Conference back40::soapbox

	I don't understand this excommunication stuff anyways.  What
	does the RC church think it's accomplishing by casting people
	out?  It's so...so...so...I don't know...ridiculous.

    .14540
    
    > What
    > does the RC church think it's accomplishing
    
    Purification of the Mystical Body of Christ, i.e., the Faithful.  It
    wouldn't do to have members who are active in organizations of which
    the Church disapproves.

  .14542  Yes, after all, if the Church allowed those members to stay,
	  there's a chance they'd eventually see the supposed error
	  of their ways, and that just wouldn't do either.

        Z    don't understand this excommunication stuff anyways.  What
        Z    does the RC church think it's accomplishing by casting people
        Z    out?  It's so...so...so...I don't know...ridiculous.
    
    When Swaggart did his little thing, he was defrocked from the
    Assemblies of God Church.  When a young man in the Corinthian church
    was having an affair with his fathers wife, he was disfellowshipped
    from the church because of his lack of repentence.  
    
    Disfellowshipping members from a church is under the guidelines of
    scriptural authority and proper church operations.
    
    The Roman Catholic Church simply has guidelines theu expect their
    members to adhere to.  The danger of a universal church so large is
    that it can easily build factions, which is why Rome has to have a 
    strong hold on the ordinances and rules of the church.  What the RC
    Church is accomplishing is consistency.  
    
    I am a firm believer in the authority of the local church.  If somebody
    has been a devoted Catholic all their lives, I believe the onus is upon
    them to acquiesce to the guidelines of the church, not the other way
    around.
    
    -Jack

    
    >When Swaggart did his little thing
    
    
    	Wasn't it Swaggart's mistress that did his little thing?
    

    .14545  Consistency and guidelines?  Why are those so paramount in the
	    soul salvation business?  Seems to miss the whole point.

Gotta keep them troops in line.

>  .14542  Yes, after all, if the Church allowed those members to stay,
>	  there's a chance they'd eventually see the supposed error
>	  of their ways, and that just wouldn't do either.


  Or, they could stay and cause further disruption in the church.  A close
  analogy would be the bad apple spoiling the rest of the bunch.  While I
  realize many non-church people would not understand, it makes sense from
  the perspective of the mission of the Church, particularly if activities
  folks are involved in are contrabiblical.



 Jim

     Z   Consistency and guidelines?  Why are those so paramount in the
     Z   soul salvation business?  Seems to miss the whole point.
    
    Well, soul saving is only a part of it.  The main function of the
    church is to provide fellowship for those of likemindedness.  It is
    also a place to worship God as a collective body, to encourage one
    another in the faith, and for training in the faith.  
    
    I am reminded of a one time wonderful seminary on the east coast called
    Princeton.  Princeton was run by the late Woodrow Wilson and it was at
    one time an institute of great Biblical learning.
    
    Princeton made a grave error.  They hired a professor who did not
    adhere to their doctrines and within a few short years, Princeton did
    not carry the fervor they once had for the cause of Christ.  They have
    now become basically a whitewashed tomb with dead men's bones within.
    The one time seminary of honor is now a cemetary of liberal theology.
    
    Likemindedness and consistency ARE paramount to the Christian faith,
    and it is the responsibility of the church to uphold the faith at all
    cost!  Even at the cost of losing everything they have.
    
    -Jack 

    |church is to provide fellowship for those of likemindedness.  

    This is why it is necessary to have 1.85 x 10� flavours of churches.

    Likemindedness until you don't see it my way. 

>  Even at the cost of losing everything they have.

Even if it kills them.

>        <<< Note 17.14550 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Every knee shall bow" >>>
>  While I
>  realize many non-church people would not understand, it makes sense from
>  the perspective of the mission of the Church

	I was raised as a devout Catholic, so I don't know if I'd
	really qualify as a "non-church" person, but I don't see the point.
	If there are 100 people strong in their faith, surely there's
	something seriously wrong if they can be swayed by one person
	whose views are somewhat different.

>       <<< Note 17.14553 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "Madison...5'2'' 95 lbs." >>>

>   It is
>   also a place to worship God as a collective body, to encourage one
>   another in the faith, and for training in the faith.  

    Oh yes, excommunicating someone is very encouraging.

    Diane, excommunicating is necessary in order to maintain the precepts
    of their particular doctrine.  Some of the greatest encouragement the
    church experienced in history was during the darkest times of its
    existence.  In my years as a church member, I experienced only one time
    seeing somebody disfellowshipped.  The person was confronted by the
    offended party...didn't change.  The person was then confronted by the
    deacons and pastor...didn't change.  The person was then discussed at a
    business meeting and it was decided this person for the betterment of
    themselves and the church, be asked to leave.  Encouragement doesn't
    always come in one package.  Sometimes we can take comfort in knowing
    we did the right thing.  
    
    Incidently, if I were excommunicated from the RC Church, I would take
    that as a clear signal for myself this isn't the church for me.  It
    seems like nobody really should be crying in their beer if it gets to a
    point of disfellowship.  Hopefully, it would have been a long process.
    
    -Jack

    The church has become more worried about maintaining precepts than
    maintaining souls. Or, perhaps that's the way it's always been and I
    was just too stupid to realize it.

> It seems like nobody really should be crying in their beer if it gets to a
> point of disfellowship.


Which would explain why we aren't seeing a bunch of Midwestern (ex-)Catholics
taking the bishop to court, one supposes.

That and the "voluntary nature" of the excommunication.

 Z   The church has become more worried about maintaining precepts than
 Z   maintaining souls. Or, perhaps that's the way it's always been and
 Z   I was just too stupid to realize it.
    
    Depends on the church I guess.  In the case of my church,
    disfellowshipping stems from a blatant disregard for living above
    reproach.  For other churches, it may be something like a belief in an
    ideology not in harmony with that particular church.  
    
     

| <<< Note 17.14558 by MOLAR::DELBALSO "I (spade) my (dogface)" >>>

| >  Even at the cost of losing everything they have.

| Even if it kills them.

	Them? You mean others, don't you? 

    |disfellowshipping stems from a blatant disregard for living above 
    |reproach.

    You mean, they got caught.

    Either that, or they are trouble makers or they're not playing ball with
    the kowtowing leadership under the fascist control of the senior pastor.

>    Depends on the church I guess.  In the case of my church,
>    disfellowshipping stems from a blatant disregard for living above
>    reproach.

What say we disfellowship Jack from The Church of The 'Box for a blatant
disregard for noting above reproach?

>	For other churches, it may be something like a belief in an
>    ideology not in harmony with that particular church.  

Or walking around in a meeting nekkid, right?

   .14562  monsieur, vous etes sage en tabarouette!

>       <<< Note 17.14561 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "Madison...5'2'' 95 lbs." >>>

>  Sometimes we can take comfort in knowing we did the right thing.  

	And this doesn't strike you as being a tad self-righteous?
	You "did the right thing" by casting out this little
	human blemish on the face of the Church?  You all decided
	that this person wasn't worthy of worshipping with you?

    I have a real problem, as a believer, with church leadership throwing
    their weight around on doctrinal issues and asking certains members to
    "stop attending" because of their beliefs.  First and foremost, I
    believe doctrinal issues should NEVER get to the point where it divides
    a chuerch or its membership.
    
    There are very specific scriptural reasons why  there is a need for
    church discipline.  I don't believe or advocate its use for issues such
    as doctrinal differences.
    
    Ron

    I have no problem with a Church saying "You're not toeing the line.
    Therefore you cannot be a member of this Church."
    
    I do have a problem with a Church saying, "You're not toeing the line.
    Therefore you are cast out and no Christian shall give you sustenance
    or succour unless they care to join you in eternal damnation. From this
    day forward the hands of all Christendom will be turned against you."
    
    Being un-Churched and being excommunicated are not the same thing.
    
      Annie

    Diane, your oversimplifying this quite a bit.  You will find in secular
    terms that people disfellowshipped will usually walk out the door with
    middle finger extended upwards.
    

>       <<< Note 17.14580 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "Madison...5'2'' 95 lbs." >>>

	And a few thousand upwards middle fingers waving goodbye?

    What can be gained praying in a church that cannot be gained sitting on
    a hillside, in the shower, in traffic?

    Praying on the hillside, shower, traffic, I mean.

    Gosh lunchie, u r starting to really impress me!
    
    Right me off-line!

   .14582  I think the church would vouch for there being a lot gained. ;>

    Yup, pretty hard to collect all thos little envelopes when the brethren
    are scattered on hillsides, in showers and in traffic.  I guess they
    could always set up direct deposit....

    Mind you I'm not opposed to the church, I go, once in a while, and I
    think the sense of community is nice. 

    How long have the bretheren been doing this shower thing?
    
    This troubles me.

    Diane, yes that pretty much sums it up.  For example, if the Pope made
    an edict that all pro choice members from this point are
    excommunicated, I for one would shake the dust off my feet and attend a
    local church that is more in line with my personal beliefs.  It is not
    up to the church to acquiesce to my desires...but I don't have to go
    there either.
    
 Z   What can be gained praying in a church that cannot be gained sitting on
 Z   a hillside, in the shower, in traffic?
    
    Lunchbox, very simple really.  A church is an Ecclesia, or a local
    assembly.  Jesus instituted the church as a tool for linkminded
    individuals to build one another up in the faith.
    
    The other experiences you mentioned would only bring delight as a
    religious experience should you smoke weed or do mushrooms.  Otherwise,
    there is no value in it...except maybe getting in touch with your
    feminine side or some such!
    
    

    Don't u use Dial,  don't u wush all of u did????   e

    It's sad that you need others or narcotics to have a religeous
    experience, Jack. Myself, I need only to look at a mountain, or a
    flower, or a cat; some simple yet majestic creation of God's to have a
    religeous experience. I hope you find that freedom someday.

    TTWA: Shouldn't this be in the Spritual Matters note?  

>       <<< Note 17.14589 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "Madison...5'2'' 95 lbs." >>>
    
>    The other experiences you mentioned would only bring delight as a
>    religious experience should you smoke weed or do mushrooms.  Otherwise,
>    there is no value in it...except maybe getting in touch with your
>    feminine side or some such!

     Yeah right.  Having one-on-one's with God is somehow not as valuable
     as getting together on a particular day of the week, in a particular
     building, with a particular group of people to talk with him through
     a particular clergyman.  I don't get it.
    
    

    
    	If "this" means .14592, then no, I'd say you put it in the right
    	place.
    

 Z   Yeah right.  Having one-on-one's with God is somehow not as valuable
 Z   as getting together on a particular day of the week, in a
 Z   particular building, with a particular group of people to talk with him
 Z   through a particular clergyman.  I don't get it.
    
    One on ones with the Almighty can be a very enlightening experience,
    but experiencing the awe of Gods power by admiring the mountains or any
    other creation is only one component of understanding God better.
    
    As Jesus said, Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.  
    Attending a church service is a means to growing in faith and becoming
    better rooted in it.
    
    -Jack

    .14595
    
    > As Jesus said, Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.
    
    Hearing the word of God is done by hearing the Bible being read.  Or,
    for a more personal approach, reading it oneself.  Anything else is the
    words of another human being, telling you what he or she thinks the
    word of God means.  I prefer mainlining, thanks, those intellectual
    strainers tend to thin out the power.
    
    > Attending a church service is a means to growing in faith and becoming
    > better rooted in it.
    
    But hardly the only means.  Or, for some people, hardly an effective
    means.  Attending church functions, of whatever sort, is a means of
    sharing one's faith with others of nominally similar mind.  For some
    people, church has little or no value toward the strengthening of
    personal faith - religious hermitry is not without meaning or value.

   .14595  Well then don't say that nothing can be gained from Lunchbox's
	   proposed methods of worship.  One could always go to the
	   hillside with bible in hand, or be so familiar with scripture
	   that it's not necessary - who knows?

	   Some people may benefit (or feel that they're benefitting) from
	   worshipping in groups, there's no doubt about that.  But 
	   there's nothing wrong with eschewing the formal and ritualistic
	   in favor of the more direct approach, as far as I can see.
	   If the belief is sincere, that should be all that matters.

    Di:
    
    Stop being nitpicky.  In what Jack said, there was/is nothing wrong
    with worshipping alone nor worshipping in groups....it;s a personal
    preference.
    
    Ron

>    What can be gained praying in a church that cannot be gained sitting on
>    a hillside, in the shower, in traffic?


    Both can be quite beneficial.  I have a couple of favorite places
    where I go to pray..however, there is more to church to benefit the
    believer than just praying together.



 Jim

>          <<< Note 17.14598 by USAT02::HALLR "God loves even you!" >>>

>    Stop being nitpicky.  In what Jack said, there was/is nothing wrong
>    with worshipping alone nor worshipping in groups....it;s a personal
>    preference.

	Nitpicky?  That's becoming a fave word now, eh?  Brilliant.  Well,
	how about you read this and then get back to me?:

>       <<< Note 17.14589 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "Madison...5'2'' 95 lbs." >>>
    
>    The other experiences you mentioned would only bring delight as a
>    religious experience should you smoke weed or do mushrooms.  Otherwise,
>    there is no value in it...except maybe getting in touch with your
>    feminine side or some such!

>     Yeah right.  Having one-on-one's with God is somehow not as valuable
>     as getting together on a particular day of the week, in a particular
>     building, with a particular group of people to talk with him through
>     a particular clergyman.  I don't get it.
    
 

      I believe individual "one on one's" with God are extremely valuable.
      However in the Bible, on which many churches are based, speaks of 
      believers gathering together on a regular basis..for prayer, for
      fellowship, etc..there is strength for the believer when gathered
      together..encouragement, sharing of burdens, etc.
    
      Though in my church we don't talk to Him through a clergyman.  We have
      a pastor who is there to teach encourage..but, I know a few churches
      who do not have a pastor.




 Jim   

    Di:
    
    I'm trying to get a quote out, so I'm pressed for time, but didn't he
    state later that worshipping alone also has value?
    
    When I get a chance tonite, I'll reread this string and then get back
    to you.
    
    Ron

Things to Wonder About, people, Things to Wonder About!

    
    Just don't covet thy pastor's wife!!

    See, somehow Jack is closer to God than I am because:
    
    a) he is under the influence of mushrooms or weed.
    
    or
    
    b) He goes to a building and chants with a bunch of people
       in front of a picture of a blue eyed Jesus, plus probably
       puts $$ in the basket. The revolution must be funded.
    
    
    lunchbox

    Again, I'm not putting the church down, I just believe God is
    omnipresent, not just in a 3,000 sq. ft. building. I don't know who
    Jack is to ridicule my method of worship.

    
    	I don't know about excommunication, but I can say a little about
    	dis-fellowship.
    
    	I don't suppose it's any different than the Amish concept of
    	shunning.  If you are involved in a particular behavior, and
        no one objects, you may begin to believe there is implied consent.
    	Some folks, even with objections voiced to them (by a friend or
    	pastor), will choose to continue in that behavior.  If the Pastor
    	believes that the person intends to continue in sin, then there
    	may be dis-fellowship.  Hopefully, this is rare, and I believe
    	that it's a painful process for a body of believers to go through.
    
    	Also, what would you think of a church that allowed all types
    	of behavior to continue unchecked ?  Would you respect it ?  
    	Likely, the bad apples get held up as an example of why that
    	particular denomination or religion are so horrible.  
    
    	Again, I suspect and hope that this is rare.  I have never
    	known it to occur in the churches I've attended in the past
    	seven years.
    
    	Karen
    

>           <<< Note 725.48 by USAT02::HALLR "God loves even you!" >>>
    
>    When I get a chance tonite, I'll reread this string and then get back
>    to you.

	It's not worth it.  I don't give a rat's patoot at this point
	whether you could follow that little chain of notes or not.
	I wasn't nitpicking.

    Di:
    
    Go soak your head and then re-read Jack's .41.  Then u will know why I
    said u were nitpicking and u denied that Jack subsequently never said
    such without referring to .41.  
    
    BTW, Jesus sent his disciples out to a secluded spot for some r&r so
    there is no disagreement about getting time alone with 'nature.'  In
    the other hand, after this period of r&r, the disciples went back to
    their efforts and worshipped together.  There is a time and place for
    everything.
    
    The first 'churches' were actually the house churches not unlike that
    occurring in mainland China today.  A group of believers would meet
    periodically to fellowship, pray and read.  
    
    Lunchie can have his own church on a hillside, in the shower or
    whatever and if he follows scriptural teachings, he is none the worse
    for wear.
    
    Ron

    Not according to Jack, who said I needed to have mushrooms, weed or be
    getting in touch with my feminine side to have a religeous experience
    alone on a hill or in traffic. 

    Lunchie:
    
    U go read .41 also and then soak yer head, too!
    
    :-)

    I read .41, have you read .35?  I don't need a crop of people gathered
    on a Sunday to reinforce my faith, so I am inferior to Jack, it seems.

    .57
    
    soak thine own head. please.

    Lunchie:
    
    I have reread both.  What Jack said in .35 was his original position
    than he added the caveat in .41.  He prolly owes u an apology.  As for
    Di, who knows what has been wrong with her lately.

    Di is distraught that tomorrow is my last day at DEC. She'll probably
    be ok in a week or so. If not, call me.
    
    
    lunchbox

    Lunchie:
    
    I know Di is distraught over something;  I hazard to say that it isn't
    over u leaving mama DEC.

    It's not so much I'm leaving DEC, she's fearful of the void that will
    be left in SOAPBOX without me, and who wouldn't be?  But the 'box is
    strong, and will heal itself in my absence.  :>)

    oh, i venture to say that di's not big on 
    narrowmindedness.  yeah, that would be my
    guess.

    Lunchbox, I apologize for my lack of full thought on the matter.  Just
    to clear a few things up...
    
    There are plenty of people in this country who have gotten into the
    habit of worshipping the created rather than the creator.  Like I said,
    experiencing the awe of God's creation is a small part of understanding
    God.  You didn't mention prayer, reading scripture or anything else. 
    You spoke of climbing a mountain, watching the traffic, or going to the
    ocean and therefore, you also communicated incompletely.  I hear many
    people who feel they become close to God through nature.  They are
    living under false pretenses.
    
    Secondly, We have absolutely no pictures or statues of Jesus, blue eyed
    or otherwise in our church.  It's a false depiction, since we really
    don't know how Jesus looks.  Yet another silly misconception of yours,
    but don't worry, your biases do you an injustice because you seem like
    a nice person.
    
    Thirdly and I'm going to try and chide you and others for this.  I hear
    you speak condecendingly regarding the issue of tithing.  I find this
    sort of dialog to be somewhat annoying.  Ignorant is more an
    appropriate term.  So you've been turned off because some clergy out
    there are abusing what God has mandated for them...
    
    Tithing is a commandment under the Old Testament law.  You seem to make
    light of the fact that God honors faith.  What the church does with the
    funds is the responsibility of you, the member.  It is not your place
    to kick the concept of giving because your view has been tainted.  
    
    The offering plate is a duty, a ministry, and is necessary for the
    operation of a church.  Don't call that which God has deemed good evil.
    Keep in mind that churches are the backbone of charity in this country,
    and our government would be a lost soul without them.
    
    -Jack

    I don't worship nature, Jack, I recognize that God created nature, that
    something so magical couldn't create itself, and allow myself to become
    awestruck with God's power. I do feel, however that the earth and all
    of it's blessings are sacred.
    
    I was raised Roman Catholic, and our church has pictures of blonde,
    blue eyed Jesus hanging all over the place, hence my misconception of
    your church.
    
    
    
    
    
    lunchbox

 Z   I don't worship nature, Jack, I recognize that God created nature, that
 Z   something so magical couldn't create itself, and allow myself to
 Z   become awestruck with God's power.
    
    Yes, and I didn't know this when you asked your original question.  I
    also was raised in the Roman Catholic Church.  To the Roman Catholic
    Church and to my mother, who had the gumption to bring me to church
    every week, I owe a great amount of respect.  Church and Sunday School 
    set the foundation for asking the questions, "who is God", "how is my
    life affected by my relationship or lack thereof with God?", etc.  The
    answers, I never really understood until I got into my college years.
    I left because I didn't feel they placed enough emphasis on scripture
    and the authority of scripture.  That was just a personal preference
    but I believe an important one.
    
    Communing with God is important, and something I strongly encourage. 
    However, the edification and fellowship with other believers is
    paramount to one's understanding of the nature of God.  
    
    -Jack

    School and church caused you to ask the question "who is God?", but to
    me, they were telling me who God was. I adhere to most of it, but I've
    drawn my own conclusions from what I've seen/heard/done. My parents
    were in the choir, so I spent every week in the choir loft watching the
    mass from above. 
    
    I believe there is only one God, yet countless ways to worship him,
    hence baptist, catholic, evangelist, etc.
    
    I get more out of watching a river go by or a baby sleep than I do from
    sitting in a pue on Sunday. How many people in a church are just "going
    through the motions"?  You've said the Lord's Prayer so many times it
    just rolls out of your mouth.  I know it happens to me.  It can get
    downright distracting in a church, what with babies crying, folks
    coughing, sirens going by outside.  I am closest to God when I am able
    to absorb Him in an environment created solely by Him, by myself.  Even
    having this conversation with you does more for my faith than a month
    of church would.  I speak about God with my friends when the subject
    comes up.  I guess what turns me off is the repetition of church.
    
    
    lunchbox

    Lunchbox:
    
    I understand what you are saying...and speaking for myself, I found the
    recitation of prayer to be meaningless for me...simply due to my
    complacency in repeating the same thing over.  To some, doing this may
    have great meaning but not for me.  
    
    I found at my church anyway, the methodology of worship is quite
    different.  Although we follow a similar format each week, the
    mode of worship is more spontaneous and the prayer is not recited, it
    is spoken.  
    
    Lunchbox, Knowledge of God's Word is a great asset to the life of a
    believer.  I would strongly encourage you to find a church where God's
    Word is not only preached but is studied in depth.  Learning takes a
    lifetime but I believe you will find it well worth the effort.
    
    Rgds.,
    
    -Jack

    I hear what you're saying and I will honestly consider it.
    
    
    However, I also have some advice for you: Put down your Bible for a
    while and marvel, outside the black and white print, at what God has
    created.  Go to an aquarium and watch the sharks swim, perfect in their
    design.  Open a medical book and wonder at the complexity and
    efficiency of the human body.  Look at a flower, see how it attracts
    the bee to spread it's pollen.  These things _could not_ have created
    themselves, they are the work of genious beyond our comprehension.  God
    is everywhere, find Him outside of established realms, it's easier to
    witness a miricle yourself than to read or hear about it!!!  More
    rewarding, too, I think.  
    
    
    
    lunchbox

    70 replies in less than three hours. Must be the BOX was starving for
    another thumper topic.

    Lunchbox:
    
    Believe me, I see what has been created and I don't take it for
    granted.  I only read like a chapter or two a day...that's all.  
    But I do believe within Christian circles that scripture has become
    somewhat of a secondary source of understanding who God is.  
    
    -Jack

    I feel that seeing creation is more important than learning scriptures. 
    I guess we're from opposite schools of thought!!!  :>)
    I'm not downplaying the importance of scripture, I just think I would
    be closer to God now if somebody had taken me out to see these things,
    pointed out their magnificence, and told me who made them than sitting
    me in a stuffy environment and reading to me(complete with words no 6
    year old could understand) when I was little.  Maybe I'm making up for
    lost time. 
    
    
    >>I only read like a chapter or two a day...that's all.
    
    
    If mz_deb or Lady Di finds out that you are using "like" in that
    capacity you're in for it big time!!!!!
    
    
    
    
    lunchbox

re .66:

Odd.  I was also raised Roman Catholic and I've _never_ seen a blond or
blue-eyed Jesus in any church.  I'd believe such pictures/statues could exist
in, say, Scandinavian countries either because they wanted to show Jesus as
being an ordinary man as far as he appeared to the people, or because the
people (or the local clergy) didn't understand the concept of darker people.

TTWA:
   Whether that Midwestern bishop would be more interested in this
   discussion, or how many Closet Masons he's administering communion
   to?

    Bwaaaaaahaaa.....

    Tom, how's that thumper index doing?

Z    I feel that seeing creation is more important than learning scriptures. 
Z    I guess we're from opposite schools of thought!!!  :>)
    
    In the context of understanding the nature of God?  God's nature is
    quite evident by our surroundings and his creation.  But you, Lunchbox,
    must strive on to greater things.  Scripture is a foggy window giving
    us a glimpse at the nature of God, but it is a vital part of the
    learning process.  Without it, our perception of God can only be
    derived from our intellect.  
    
    Jesus referred to himself as the great shepherd.  The implication here
    is that we are the sheep, or the lambs.  Sheep are by nature stupid
    animals.  They are always wandering astray and need guidance.  The
    amazing thing sheep have over us is that they don't think they're
    smart.  Intellect is one of our most cherished attributes; however, it
    is also our greatest downfall.
    
 Z   I'm not downplaying the importance of scripture, I just think I
 Z   would be closer to God now if somebody had taken me out to see these
 Z   things, pointed out their magnificence, and told me who made them than
 Z   sitting me in a stuffy environment and reading to me(complete with words no
 Z   6 year old could understand) when I was little.  Maybe I'm making up
 Z   for lost time. 
  
Lunchbox, keep in mind the whole idea isn't to FEEL closer to God.  Feelings 
are pretty much a counterfeit measurement and cannot be relied upon.  The 
important thing is to DEAL with the substance of your faith.  Remember the 
apostles who swore up and down that they would die for Jesus a few days later
quivered in the streets of Jerusalem for fear of losing their lives.  Peter 
even went so far as to deny knowing Jesus.  Yes, feelings are definitely a 
poor indicator of feeling closer to God.

As far as your church being a stuffy environment, well, find a church where 
God's Word is being taught and you can get exicted about it.  They are out 
there!!!

-Jack  

    Why is it that some people in this string find it difficult to accept
    that an organization can have rules and expect those who wish to belong
    to follow those rules?  It's really that simple.  If you wish to be a
    member of the Catholic Church then you should be willing to follow the
    rules it establishes.  If you can not agree with the rules then you
    should leave voluntarily, it should not be necessary for the
    organization request that you leave.
    
    It is the same thing as working for Digital.  If you constantly bad
    mouth Digital and it's products, refuse to support the aims of Digital
    and actively work for the success of organization directly in conflict
    with Digital, I don't think anyone would complain the you got booted.
    
    Also, as a point of reference.  the head of the ACLU, over time,
    changed his view on abortion.  He originally was in support of Roe v
    Wade and ultimately came to the conclusion the abortion was wrong.  As
    he bagen to speak out, he came under increrasing pressure from the
    ACLU.  It finally resulted in his being removed from the ACLU.  Now
    this is an organization the claims to support free-speech.  They go so
    far as to claim that burning the most important symbol of our country
    is free-speech.  Why is ti that they can get rid of someone who is
    excersing their free-speech rights?
    
    If it's Ok for the ACLU, then it should be Ok for the church.
    

   .79  I never thought of being a member of the Catholic church in
	the same way that I think of being an employee of Digital.
	I've always thought that people should be able to go worship
	in whatever church they want, if that's how they like to
	worship, without having to worry about the church scrutinizing
	their activities and throwing them out.  The idea is to bring
	people to God, not push them away.  Or so I would have thought.

    It's not simple at all. The church has a way of demanding loyalty and
    has a way of enforcing it. In our democratic society, we think
    democratically and we kind of expect the church to behave that way. It
    just doesn't. It pretends to be that way with memberships and
    elections. But when push comes to shove and there is trouble and
    division, the head honchos roll in and start making decisions and
    taking action unilaterally and the plebe pew warmers have little or no
    recourse. They usually just leave and go somewhere else. 

    Another reason why it isn't simple is that, rarely will anyone claim to
    be wrong. I you can believe that God has personally shown you what is
    right in a situation, it's pretty difficult to be persuaded to see
    things differently. 

    The church is a very political place. It's not simple.

    .80
    
    I tend to agree somewhat with your statement, but there is a basic
    point that I believe can not be ignored.  For sake of example, let me
    take a radical example.  If someone was a member of a Jewish
    congregation and also belonged to a skinhead group and the KKK, I
    believe the members of that congregation would have a real problem with
    keeping him as a member.
    
    I believe the same applies in this situation, although granted, not as
    extreme.  the Catholic Church is opposed to abortion and if members
    wish to belong to organizations that are diametrically opposed to the
    Church's stance, then the member really needs to decide if this church
    is right for them.  For them to participate with the rest of the
    members while working or supporting an organization that opposes church
    teachings is wrong.
    
    I would prefer to have the member leave of their own volition, but if
    they refuse then I don't think there is much alternative.
    

    .81
    
    Unfortunately it really is simple.  The church is not a liberal
    democratic organization that proposes legislation and you get to vote
    on what you want to believe.  The church puts forward what it believes
    and what it expects of its' members.  If you don't agree with it, you
    are, of course, free to leave.  What you aren't free to do is support
    diametrically opposed poisitons and remain as a member.
    
     I can think of no reason why anyone would want to stay in an
    organization that has views significantly different than their own.  If
    you think that the church should support abortion and euthanasia, then
    by all means find a congregation that holds similar views.  It baffles
    me that you would say that I am a member of X, but I don't accept their
    beliefs, rules or tenets.
    

>     I can think of no reason why anyone would want to stay in an
>    organization that has views significantly different than their own.

The rationale that I often hear is that many opponents have a firm belief
that much of the Church's principles and practices are right, and worth
maintaining proximity to, and that there's a better chance to bring about
change from within than there is from an outsider's position.

    Well, not all issues of doctrine are that polarized. It isn't the black
    and white issues that cause the greatest division. It's the little
    things. For example, some churches believe that the office of a prophet
    still exists. When such a prophet comes along and starts disturbing the
    status quo, division happens. The prophetic voice is usually squelched
    or called false. So, though both sides believe the same thing, they
    react to it differently.

    It's not simple. I could go on and on citing examples.

>                      <<< Note 725.82 by ACISS1::ROCUSH >>>

    I agree that in your radical example, there's reason for alarm and
    concern on the part of the congregation and the church, to the point
    of wanting the person gone, because there's reason to believe there
    could actually be a safety issue in that case.  Planned Parenthood
    is another story though.  

>    For them to participate with the rest of the
>    members while working or supporting an organization that opposes church
>    teachings is wrong.

    This I don't really see.  If someone is quietly going about the
    business of trying to get to know God and find salvation in Him,
    and feels that the doctrines of a particular church most closely
    match his beliefs, but feels that trying to be responsible about
    when to bring children into the world is something that's also worth
    working towards, why is it any skin off the Church's nose?

    I'm curious as to what the reasons have been for excommunication
    historically, statistically-speaking.  Maybe Mr. Covert has some
    information on that?  

>Tom, how's that thumper index doing?
    
The thumper index (at least according to me) stands at 3.1, which I believe to 
be quite low. Group 1, are those topics that are given a full point for being
thumper oriented. Group 2, are each given a half point for their large 
percentage of thumper replies. Of course this is only my opinion, I could be 
wrong.

GROUP 1.
--------
    20   TROOA::COLLINS      17-NOV-1994  4522  Abortion
    24  COVERT::COVERT       17-NOV-1994   251  Thanksgiving
    28  COVERT::COVERT       17-NOV-1994   353  Just say "No" to Euthanasia
    33  COVERT::COVERT       17-NOV-1994  2267  Separation of Church and State // School Prayer
    64   TROOA::COLLINS      18-NOV-1994   875  Evolution
    67   MOLAR::DELBALSO     18-NOV-1994   393  Satan Worshippers
   143  COVERT::COVERT        6-DEC-1994    13  Vindication
   186  PNTAGN::WARRENFELTZR 16-DEC-1994   139  One Solitary Life
   319   SMURF::BINDER       28-FEB-1995  1635  The truth of the Bible
   347  SX4GTO::OLSON        17-MAR-1995   295  religious fundamentalists, fanatics, zealots, etc.
   382  USAT05::BENSON       11-APR-1995   316  JESUS' CRUCIFIXION
   385  STRATA::BARBIERI     14-APR-1995    29  The Two Crosses
   388  COVERT::COVERT       16-APR-1995    47  Christ's Resurrection
   390  MKOTS3::JMARTIN      17-APR-1995   789  How Christians Should Act in the Box
   430  JULIET::MORALES_NA   18-MAY-1995   586  Religious Equality in Schools Amendment
   444  OUTSRC::HEISER       31-MAY-1995   386  Creation Science
   703  USAT02::HALLR        12-APR-1996    56  Spiritual Matters
   725  PENUTS::DDESMAISONS   9-MAY-1996    85  Excommunication             

GROUP 2.
--------
    56   AIMHI::JMARTIN      18-NOV-1994  4098  Gay Issues Topic
    68   POBOX::BATTIS       18-NOV-1994   134  Christmas 1994
    89  SX4GTO::OLSON        21-NOV-1994   369  priestly pedophilia (bishops, too - see .134)
    90  VMSNET::M_MACIOLEK   22-NOV-1994    42  Money: Truly the Root of all Evil
   139    BIGQ::SILVA         5-DEC-1994   276  Parents and sex
   320  USAT05::BENSON        1-MAR-1995   121  TRUTH
   433  COVERT::COVERT       20-MAY-1995    66  The Middle East
   469  NOTIME::SACKS        21-JUN-1995   122  The Incest Topic
   538  SNOFS1::DAVISM        4-SEP-1995   191  Christmas 1995
   541  PENUTS::DDESMAISONS  12-SEP-1995   515  Pregnancies - who's responsible?

    You forgot my..."How atheists should act in the box.
    

The thumper index (at least according to me) stands at 3.3, which I believe to 
be quite low. Group 1, are those topics that are given a full point for being
thumper oriented. Group 2, are each given a half point for their large 
percentage of thumper replies. Of course this is only my opinion, I could be 
wrong.

GROUP 1.
--------
    20   TROOA::COLLINS      17-NOV-1994  4522  Abortion
    24  COVERT::COVERT       17-NOV-1994   251  Thanksgiving
    28  COVERT::COVERT       17-NOV-1994   353  Just say "No" to Euthanasia
    33  COVERT::COVERT       17-NOV-1994  2267  Separation of Church and State // School Prayer
    64   TROOA::COLLINS      18-NOV-1994   875  Evolution
    67   MOLAR::DELBALSO     18-NOV-1994   393  Satan Worshippers
   143  COVERT::COVERT        6-DEC-1994    13  Vindication
   186  PNTAGN::WARRENFELTZR 16-DEC-1994   139  One Solitary Life
   319   SMURF::BINDER       28-FEB-1995  1635  The truth of the Bible
   347  SX4GTO::OLSON        17-MAR-1995   295  religious fundamentalists, fanatics, zealots, etc.
   382  USAT05::BENSON       11-APR-1995   316  JESUS' CRUCIFIXION
   385  STRATA::BARBIERI     14-APR-1995    29  The Two Crosses
   388  COVERT::COVERT       16-APR-1995    47  Christ's Resurrection
   389  MKOTS3::JMARTIN      17-APR-1995   385  How Atheists Should Act in the `
   390  MKOTS3::JMARTIN      17-APR-1995   789  How Christians Should Act in the Box
   430  JULIET::MORALES_NA   18-MAY-1995   586  Religious Equality in Schools Amendment
   444  OUTSRC::HEISER       31-MAY-1995   386  Creation Science
   703  USAT02::HALLR        12-APR-1996    56  Spiritual Matters
   725  PENUTS::DDESMAISONS   9-MAY-1996    85  Excommunication             

GROUP 2.
--------
    56   AIMHI::JMARTIN      18-NOV-1994  4098  Gay Issues Topic
    68   POBOX::BATTIS       18-NOV-1994   134  Christmas 1994
    89  SX4GTO::OLSON        21-NOV-1994   369  priestly pedophilia (bishops, too - see .134)
    90  VMSNET::M_MACIOLEK   22-NOV-1994    42  Money: Truly the Root of all Evil
   139    BIGQ::SILVA         5-DEC-1994   276  Parents and sex
   320  USAT05::BENSON        1-MAR-1995   121  TRUTH
   433  COVERT::COVERT       20-MAY-1995    66  The Middle East
   469  NOTIME::SACKS        21-JUN-1995   122  The Incest Topic
   538  SNOFS1::DAVISM        4-SEP-1995   191  Christmas 1995
   541  PENUTS::DDESMAISONS  12-SEP-1995   515  Pregnancies - who's responsible?

You folks seem to not know much about excommunication.

When the Roman Catholic Church excommunicates someone, the Church has not
said that the person is no longer a member of the Church.

The excommunicate person is still a member of the Church, but is prohibited
from receiving the sacraments of the Church.

Excommunication is a disciplinary measure, intended to cause the person
to repent and be restored to good standing.

/john

    John is correct. Excommunication, in churches that use the principle, is 
    part of the repentance process. It is meant to remove members from the
    temporal responsibilities of their church, to focus on the spiritual.
                                             

    <----------   Though I think it to be a pile of horse manure.  :)

    
    see:
    http://history.cc.ukans.edu/history/subject_tree/e3/gen/
    	feudal-terms/class/Church/EXCOMMUNICATION.html
    
    EXCOMMUNICATION: Exclusion from the membership of the church or from
    communion with faithful Christians. Those judged "tolerati" may still
    mingle with the faithful, but those "vitandi" cannot and are exiled.
    

    I stand corrected, if this is true. Where does it come from? This web
    page seems to be a compilation of various history research. But I don't
    get the impression that it comes from any official church doctrine.
    What I wrote in .92 was told to me by a Monsignor and also a Mormon
    Bishop. Both the RC and LDS churches practice the principle of
    excommunication.

Membership in the Church is irrevocable; the sacrament of baptism is not
reversible; it imparts immutable character.

Even those who have placed themselves outside the faithful are still members
of the body, albeit in an impaired way.

/john

    John, take your catholic blinders off.

    Is a catholic blinder a pope in the eye?

    Catholic Blinder - cardinal with shades.

    .85
    
    Your example is very weak.  There is no discussion about
    excommunicating anyone for disagreeing about a prophet.  this also
    applies to administrative matters as well.  the issue is opposing basic
    church theology and beliefs.
    
    .86
    
    You may believe that Planned Parenthood delivers a necessary function
    to people.  the church, however, opposes the abortion direction of this
    organization.  this puts the organizations into direct conflict.  this
    then, necessitates that a person decide which is more important to
    them.  If you believe that abortion is central to your life and that
    people should feel free to avail themselves of that choice, then you
    would be in direct conflict with a very basic belief of the Catholic
    Church.  You would need to reconcile that difference or leave.
    
    I believe it is extremely egotistic to think that an organization would
    change it's most core beliefs in order to make a minority of members
    comfortable with a choice which the church bans.
    
    I do agree that all religions need to reach out to people and encourage
    them to become closer to their God, but I do not believe that this
    includes prostituting themselves on the altar of current public opinion
    in order to accomplish this.
    

    GET OUT OF HERE....snarf!!!!!!

    ROCUSH, you don't have a clue.

    I was a candidate for excommunication. The reasons were shrouded in
    spiritual/biblical claptrap. Had it not been for a few people playing
    trump cards in my defense, I would have been kicked out of my church,
    excommunicated. My crime? Not supporting the status quo.

    So, piss off.

| <<< Note 725.96 by POLAR::RICHARDSON "Spank you very much!" >>>

| John, take your catholic blinders off.

	I thought you said binders..... phew...glad I was wrong. :-)

| <<< Note 725.99 by ACISS1::ROCUSH >>>



| You may believe that Planned Parenthood delivers a necessary function
| to people.  the church, however, opposes the abortion direction of this
| organization.  this puts the organizations into direct conflict.  this
| then, necessitates that a person decide which is more important to them.  

	If parts of Planned Parenthood fall under the churches beliefs, then
there should be NO problem if the people who are working there are helping out
in those particular areas. 

	Take the AIDS Walk in Boston. I have been over in the Christian
notesfile talking about this. People came right out and stated that there are
organizations that they can't possibly support because they deal with things
that they feel are wrong. And because of that they could not support the Walk.
But you know what? There are organizations that they do support that deal with
AIDS, and some are lending their time there, or are making donations to those
specific agencies. The point I am trying to get at is you don't need to support
the whole thing. If something helps, then it should not be a problem. 



Glen

>    John, take your catholic blinders off.

This topic _was_ about the Catholic Church and Excommunication.

If you want to discuss other kinds of Excommunication, do so, but
the referenced WWWeb page refers to the Catholic Church and is misleading,
as has been most of this discussion, which deals with what a Catholic
Bishop has done.

/john

    The topic title is, Excommunication.

    hth.

>                      <<< Note 725.99 by ACISS1::ROCUSH >>>
    
>    I believe it is extremely egotistic to think that an organization would
>    change it's most core beliefs in order to make a minority of members
>    comfortable with a choice which the church bans.

  Who said anything about the Church changing its core beliefs?
  Not I.

re: .99, Al

>    I believe it is extremely egotistic to think that an organization would
>    change it's most core beliefs in order to make a minority of members
>    comfortable with a choice which the church bans.

Church doctrine has changed in the past two millenia on a number of subjects.
[There were once married clergy in the Western church, were there not? A pope
 or two if I recall, as well.]

It's not outside of the realm of possibilities that, perhaps, the Pope and the
entire college of cardinals toke up one night and make some radical decisions
and, voila, you wake up the next day and find your world changed regarding
what you may have thought to have been a core belief.

It's also not always clear that it's "a minority of members" holding an
opposing view.

>The excommunicate person is still a member of the Church, but is prohibited
>from receiving the sacraments of the Church.

So, in our current Midwestern example, these folks who "excommunicate 
themselves", also take the responsibility to refrain/abstain from receiving
sacraments?

No liklihood that if they feel strongly enough about their "right" to be a
Mason or PP volunteer or whatever against the Bishop's "wishes" that they
also won't ignore their "responsibility" to not receive sacraments?

Now, I'm sure that Catechetical references will indicate that there's no
sanctity in a sacrament received under such circumstances (as with those
sacraments received while not in a state of grace), but what's actually
happening here? Last time I checked, a Catechism was still nothing more than
a book printed on paper in recent times by human beings. We've got a closet 
Mason, e.g., believing that they're in the right to continue their Masonic 
oath, regardless of what the Bishop says, thereby not recognizing their 
excommunicated status, and continuing to receive sacraments in good faith on 
their part, and no one else is the wiser. Is it not the case that the true 
sanctity of the sacrament is between the receiver and their god? [Besides 
them, who would know?]

Does your theology really lead you to believe that they don't "get away" 
with this in the eyes of their god? Does your theology truly lead you to 
believe that they mightn't have reached a personal agreement with their
god on this matter?

In the end, who's to say? I'll bet it's not a midwestern Bishop or some
old timer in the Vatican.

My biggest issue in all of this continues to be this bishop's discriminatory,
small-minded, bigoted attitude toward the Masonic orders, which, IMO, are
historically far more respectable than the Holy Roman Catholic Church. I'd
really like to see the logic behind his singling them out (aside from the
Church's traditional attitude against them in preference to that silly KofC
outfit.)

    
    "Friendship...that stops short of being 'unequally yoked" (ref:
     2 Corinthians 6:14-18) is encouraged in Scripture. We should
     show God's love and compassion and concern for all whom we come
     into contact with., even those who hate us and make themselves
     our enemies...Jesus was a "friend of publicans and sinners" and
     even ate in their homes (ref: most people who have even glanced at
     the scriptures know the ref, but here it is : Matthew 11:19, Mark
     2:15, Luke 7:36, 14:15, Matthew 9:10).
    
     The prohibition against eating with fornicators (i.e. the scriptural
     precedent for 'excommunication'), idolators, drunkards, etc, is limited 
     to anyone who is called "a brother or sister", i.e. a member of the local
     fellowship who claims to be a Christian to the local community.
    
     The reason is twofold: to bring about repentance on his or her part,
     and also to let the world know that such behaviour is not tolerated
     by the church."
    
    	--- The Berean Call Newsletter, May 1996

>Church doctrine has changed in the past two millenia on a number of subjects.
>[There were once married clergy in the Western church, were there not? A pope
> or two if I recall, as well.]

You've been told before, and I'll tell you again, that priestly celibacy
IS NOT DOCTRINE, it is _discipline_.

There are today married clergy in the Western Church, with special
dispensation.  And marriage is the norm for Roman Catholic priests
of the Eastern Churches in full communion with the See of Rome.

See, for example, http://rampages.onramp.net/~eleison/

/john

And a prohibition against membership in the Masons or PP isn't doctrine, either,
and you know it. My statement stands - there's zero reason not to expect that
it (the Church's stand on BC, or abortion, for example) could change.

Checkmate, Lucky Jack. Don't know if you set John up like that, but man, what
an ending. :-)

I have not been set up at all.  Jack's reply is simply wrong and ignorant.

There is a prohibition on involvement in organizations that promote a
theology contrary to the Catholic Faith as defined in the historic
doctrinal statements of the Church (the Apostle's Creed, the Nicene
Creed, and the Athanasian Creed).  This prohibition is biblical and
will not change.  The prohibition on Masonic membership is based on
the fact that Masonry has specific doctrines of its own about the
nature of God which are at odds with the biblical and credal definitions
of historic orthodox Christianity.  Unlike other social or community
organizations such as the Boy Scouts which promote belief in God but
do not get involved in doctrinal definitions of God (leaving that to
the member) Masonry has specific teachings which qualify it as religion
teaching the worship of a false God, prohibited in the Ten Commandments.

There is a prohibition on involvement in organizations which destroy
the creatures of God through abortion.  The prohibition on abortion is
biblical, because it is considered the killing of innocent human life
(again prohibited by one of the Ten Commandments) and will not change.

/john

By the way, both the Lutheran Church in America and the Lutheran Church
Missouri Synod also strongly condemn Masonic membership, as do many other
Protestant organizations.

/john

The bishop is not acting on his own:

Declaration on Masonic Associations

Quaesitum est

English Translation of a Latin Document from the Sacred Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith
November 26, 1983

It has been asked whether there has been any change in the Church's decision
in regard to Masonic associations since the new Code of Canon Law does not
mention them expressly, unlike the previous code.

This sacred congregation is in a position to reply that this circumstance is
due to an editorial criterion which was followed also in the case of other
associations likewise unmentioned inasmuch as they are contained in wider
categories.

Therefore, the Church's negative judgment in regard to Masonic associations
remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered
irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and, therfore, membership in
them remains forbidden. The faithful, who enroll in Masonic associations are
in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.

It is not within the competence of local ecclesiastical authorities to give
a judgment on the nature of Masonic associations which would imply a
derogation from what has been decided above, and this in line with the
declaration of this sacred congregation issued Feb. 17, 1981. [1]

In an audience granted to the undersigned cardinal prefect, the Supreme
Pontiff John Paul II approved and ordered the publication of this
declaration which had been decided in an ordinary meeting of this sacred
congregation.

Rome, from the Office of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith, Nov. 26, 1983

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
Prefect
Father Jerome Hamer, O.P.
Titular Archbishop of Lorium
Secretary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.    Cf. AAS 73 (1981) pp 240-241.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

	John, nice try, but Jack is still right.

Jack is not right.

Catholic doctrine is promulgated and declared by the Sacred Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The document I provided in .-2 is published by the CDF with the authority
of the Roman Pontiff and has the nature of a teaching of the magisterium
of the Church which must be complied with by all Catholics.

The teaching on abortion is also proclaimed as authentic doctrine by the
magisterium of the Church.

And that same magisterium has declared the following doctrine:

	A religious respect of intellect and will, even if not the
	assent of faith, is to be paid to the teaching which the Supreme
	Pontiff or the college of bishops enuntiate on faith or morals
	when they exercise the authentic magisterium even if they do
	not intend to proclaim it with a definitive act; therefore the
	Christian faithful are to take care to avoid whatever is not
	in harmony with that teaching.

/john

	As usual, you didn't address what Jack was talking about, which is why
he is still right.

      Just a smaal twist on things.
    
      Some 'good' people were excommunicated at least in spirit.
      Jesus Christ among them.
    
      Huss was excommunicated.  While being burned at the stake,
      he sang (over and over again), "Thou Son of David, have 
      mercy on me!"
    
      Excommunication is always evidence that there are differences
      and is not always evidence that the excommunicator was in 
      the right.
    
    						Tony

>As usual, you didn't address what Jack was talking about, which is why
>he is still right.

What did I not address?

/john

    re: .113
    Masonry has specific teachings which qualify it as religion
    teaching the worship of a false God, prohibited in the Ten
    Commandments.
    
    This is news to me. Please cite the "specific teachings" which qualify
    Masonry as a religion which teaches the worship of a false God. [Bear
    in mind that many Church of England bishops have been Masons, many
    Rabbis (the lodges in Israel), many Methodist pastors (my wife's pastor
    is member of my lodge in Lowell, a pastor in Concord is a member
    of another lodge in Lowell etc. We also have a Hindu and a Muslim -
    Perhaps you mean that Masonry is tolerant of it's member's religious
    beliefs and doesn't make it an issue - like the Elks, Eagles, Rotary,
    Boy Scouts, Labor Unions, Political parties)
    
    When citing your sources please give "specific" citations -
    publication, author etc. I really would like some hard evidence that
    Masonry is a "religion".

I'll make it easy on you.  Here's a document which posts both the claims
and a response from a master mason refuting the claims.

	http://www.chrysalis.org/masonry/truth.htm

It makes it pretty clear that a mason would not be permitted to honestly
answer real concerns.

/john

And here's a resource somewhat less favorable towards masonry:

	http://www.crocker.com/~acacia/antim.html

/john

This is http://www.crocker.com/~acacia/text_ms_fme.html, provided for the
WWWeb challenged:

                            FREE MASONRY EXPOSED:

                The Subject Treated From A Bible Standpoint.
                       Showing The Difference Between
                   Masonic Religion And Bible Salvation.

                              BY FRED HUSTED.

		       (Excerpts from the WWWeb site)
                     � 1996 Acacia Press, Incorporated.
                          MONTAGUE, MASSACHUSETTS.

                            Originally Published:
                                 circa 1910
                      GOSPEL TRUMPET PUBLISHING COMPANY
                          GRAND JUNCTION, MICHIGAN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            PUBLISHER'S PREFACE.

As many volumes, both opposing, and favoring Free Masonry, have been
published and scattered broadcast throughout the land, yet we realize the
great need of a brief work being placed in the hands of every person
belonging to a secret order, or who may have any intention of joining such
with the hope of bettering their condition.

It is hoped that these few pages will have the desired effect, and be the
means of rescuing many precious souls from the snare that is laid to entrap
them and lead them on and on until redemption is beyond their reach.

It is our aim to sound the alarm, and give a note of warning in due time to
the great danger in pursuing the deceptive course marked out for them,
leading them on into mysterious and unknown paths, bringing peril and
eternal destruction to their souls. It is also intended to show the plane of
Masonic religion, and compare it with the teachings of the Holy Bible. Every
professing Christian should know these things, not only for their own
benefit, but also for the purpose of warning their children and others
against impending danger.

Dear reader, if you are a member of a secret order, do not cast this book
aside until you have read and re-read its pages and pondered over the truths
contained therein. Your soul is in the balance, and much depends upon your
decision in the matter; a wrong step will prove fatal. And to those who have
escaped the snare, or have never been led into its clutches, we trust you
will extend a helping hand and aid in the rescue, sparing neither time nor
means in so doing, and should you consider this volume worthy the place for
which it is intended, see to it that each of your friends has a copy of the
same. We send it forth in the name of Jesus, asking his blessings upon it.
Yours in Him,-The Publishers at Gospel Trumpet Publishing Company.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  CONTENTS.

Masonic Obligations.

The Masonic Trinity.

Masonry is a Religion.

Masonic Salvation.

Masonic Mysteries.

Hiram Abiff vs Osiris of Egypt.

Masonic Traditions.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 CHAPTER 1:

                            MASONIC OBLIGATIONS.

AMONG the various institutions of to day there are very few, if any, that
are more binding in their obligations upon their members than is the Masonic
order. Masonry as an institution, as a craft, owes much of its great power
today as well as in times past, to the stringency of its obligations. The
balance of its power is based upon two claims, that of being very ancient,
as well as a very religious institution. Rob Masonry of its obligations or
oaths and it would fall, so take away its boast of age or semblance of
religion and the same result would follow.

Mystery in itself is powerful. So Masons have shrouded their craft in
mystery. There is nothing mysterious about Masonry when its cloak is taken
away. There is no light in the boasted knowledge of the craft. Earthly,
sensual and devilish in the extreme do we find every point of its workings
when analyzed by the Spirit and the Word of God.

To untie a mystery we must first look to the bands that enclose it. The
Masonic obligation, it is claimed among Masons, cannot be broken. To obtain
a clear idea of Masonry we must first inform ourselves as to what Masons are
expected to live up to, what they are expected to do, and as the obligation
must certainly cover a man's duty as a Mason, we give those duties as set
forth in the obligation, that is, those that can be spoken to all ears, as
there is at least one section that for reasons well known is strictly for
men only. Many wonder why men consider Masonic obligations so binding
especially so when their awful nature is revealed. Ministers (shall we say
of the gospel?) no doubt also consider them binding, at least they attend
their lodges and partake of all the nature and benefits of the craft. We now
consider the nature of the obligation.

The first or E. A. degree obligation contains only the duty of secrecy as
respects the workings of the lodge. This duty is bound by the following
penalty which is spoken by the "worshipful master" and repeated by the
candidate:

     "To all of which I most solemnly and sincerely promise and swear
     with a firm and steadfast resolution to keep and perform the same
     without the least equivocation, mental reservation of self evasion
     whatsoever: binding myself under a no less penalty than that of
     having my throat cut from ear to ear, my tongue torn out by the
     roots and buried in the rough sands of the sea at low water mark
     where the tide ebbs and flows twice in twenty-four hours, should I
     in the least knowingly or willfully violate or transgress this my
     entered apprentice obligation. So help me God and keep me
     steadfast." (Some lodges add, "in a due performance of the same.")

There is enough of a threat conveyed in the above obligation or penalty to
keep the younger initiate in subjection and wonder until he is brought a
second time in reach of Masonic light where he is again sworn to keep the
secrets of the F. C. degree in like manner. Four ties are now added covering
duties to Brother Fellow crafts and the lodge as to the answering of
summons, assistance of Brethren, etc. The candidate here promises not to
cheat, wrong or defraud a lodge of F. C's or a brother of that degree
knowingly or willfully, (nothing is said of other parties) and the penalty
as here given binds the same.

     "To all of which I most solemnly and sincerely promise and swear
     with a steadfast resolution to keep and perform the same without
     the least equivocation, mental reservation, or self evasion
     whatsoever, binding myself under a no less penalty than that of
     having my left breast torn open, my heart plucked from thence and
     given to the wild beasts of the field and the fowls of the air as
     a prey, should I in the least knowingly or willfully violate this,
     my fellow craft obligation. So help me God and keep me steadfast."

This form is the one followed in Kansas and recommended by their grand
lodge. Colorado however adds somewhat to it, but in no material way changing
the sense.

This carries the candidate somewhat deeper into the mysteries, and when he
is carefully lectured and a sufficient length of time has transpired he is
given the Master Mason's degree which increases his Masonic "light" darkness
and he finds himself bound tighter in the ungodly yoke.

The M. M. obligation contains ten "ties" or sections besides the one of
secrecy. These ten cover the ground of Masonic duty and constitute the
Masonic code of duties. They include the duties of answering and obeying all
summons under certain restrictions, obedience to all Masonic authority, with
duties to each other and their relatives and families. The most notable are
the following:

     "I furthermore promise and swear that I will keep the secrets of a
     Master Mason when communicated to me as such, 'murder and treason'
     excepted, and they left to my own election."

Note, those not excepted would probably count among their number, burglary,
arson, robbery, rape, piracy, theft, forgery, and many other things too
numerous to mention, excepting of course murder and treason. And yet Masons
tell us, and I for one was informed that there was nothing in the obligation
that would interfere with my duty to my God, my country, my neighbor, my
family, or myself; and I took the above obligation understanding it so, and
with the assurance of "worshipful master" in an official capacity that such
was the case. Would that section interfere with my duties to my neighbor if
I protected a Mason who had stolen his horse and sent him on his way
rejoicing? Any candid Mason can see at once that his M. M. obligation
commands him to keep crime a secret, except murder and treason which of
course his obligation tells him he can conceal or not as he likes, which of
course is not violating his obligation if he also keeps. What do you think
of that, you professing Christian, preacher or layman who are under the same
cursed yoke? "Be not partakers of their evil deeds." How are you going to do
that and keep that section? Every Mason when he comes to the bar of God will
be asked something about the way he has kept his obligation. If he has kept
it to the letter, that clause will send him to destruction. If he has not
kept it he has violated his Masonic obligation and is in the sight of all
Masonic eyes a perjured man, and had just as well violate them all. A
ten-year-old boy can see that, and also see what to do when it comes to
obeying God or man.

I have never yet asked God to pardon me for breaking that or any other
Masonic obligation, nor do I ever intend to do so. Another obligation or
section binds a man to respect the chastity of a Master Mason's wife,
mother, sister or daughter, but says nothing about wives, mothers, sisters
and daughters of other men, not Masons. Thus licensed they will keep their
secrets should they do so and again come under condemnation of God and man.
There are other "ties," but lack of space prevents their setting forth.

     PENALTY, M. M. DEGREE.

     "To all of which I most solemnly and sincerely promise and swear
     with a firm and steadfast resolution to keep and perform the same
     without the least equivocation, mental reservation or self evasion
     whatsoever, binding myself under no less a penalty, than that of
     having my body severed in twain, my bowels taken from thence and
     burned to ashes and they scattered to the four winds of heaven
     that there might remain no remembrance among men or Masons, of so
     vile a wretch as I would be, should I in the least knowingly or
     willfully violate or transgress this my M. M. obligation. So help
     me God and keep me steadfast ."

I have repeated these from memory and to the best of my recollection, what I
have given is verbatim. Is it necessary to call attention to the grossness
and vileness of an institution, bound by such monstrous
obligations-obligations that would shock a band of thieves, if they were
compelled to take them, to say nothing of professed ministers of the gospel?
Praising God for free salvation and complete deliverance from the power of
Satan, I feel it my duty to enlighten my ex-brother Masons, as well as any
others that may contemplate joining the order.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last updated 1/18/96

|                           Originally Published:
|                                circa 1910
    
    Old houses are built circa.  But a document of this century?
    
    								-mr. bill

              <<< ALEPPO::$1$DIA1:[NOTES$LIBRARY]MASONIC.NOTE;1 >>>
                                  -< MASONIC >-
================================================================================
Note 146.0                  Religion vs. Freemasonry                  No replies
CAPNET::ROSCH                                       227 lines  21-OCT-1994 09:35
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article: 146
From: [email protected] (M Simpson2)
Newsgroups: alt.masonic.members
Subject: Religion vs Freemasonry
Date: 20 Oct 1994 16:43:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Sender: [email protected]
 
From Northern Ireland to Iran, from the Middle East to the United States,
religious extremism is a growing force throughout the world.  Jarred by
the rapid pace of change, especially the apparent disintegration of moral
values and the breakup of the family, some people within this movement
have sought refuge from the complexity of modern life by embracing
absolute views and rejecting tolerance of other beliefs.
 
Simple, easy, seemingly stable answers bring comfort in a rapidly changing
world.  For example, some churches have responded to the personal anguish
of their members by circling the wagons, that is, by strictly defining
theological concepts and insisting their members "purify" their fellowship
by renouncing any other beliefs.
 
The next step, already taken by various churches, is to yield degrees of
control within their ranks to vocal factions espousing extremist views. 
These splinter groups focus the congregation's generalized anxieties on
specific targets.  The proffered cure-all is to destroy the supposed
enemy.  Freemasonry has become one of these targets precisely because it
encourages members to form their own opinion on many important topics,
including religion.
 
Thus some churches have expressed concerns, even condemnations, of
Freemasonry.  Generally, these actions are based on misunderstandings.  A
case in point is the June 1993 report to the Southern Baptist Convention
by the Convention's Home Mission Board.  This report defined eight alleged
conflicts between the tenets and teachings of the Masonic Fraternity and
Southern Baptist theology.
 
Let's briefly look at those areas representative of the thinking of some
well-meaning but misinformed church members today, and see if the concerns
are real or simply a matter of misinformation or misunderstanding.
 
Most of the issues really deal with language in one way of another. 
Almost every organization has a special vocabulary of words which are
understood by the group.  It's hardly appropriate for someone outside a
group, and without the special knowledge of the group, to object to the
terms unless he or she fully understands them and why they are used.
 
If someone wants to read the _Journal of the American Medical
Association_, for example, that is his right - but he doesn't have a right
to complain the articles use medical terms.  A person reading a cookbook
had better know terms like fold, cream the butter, or soft ball have
special meanings _ or he'll make a mess instead of a cake.
 
The same is true of a non-Mason reading Masonic materials.  As to the
critique of Freemasonry by the Southern Baptist Convention (which,
incidentally, had several positive things to say about Masonry), here is a
brief explanatory discussion of each point.
 
"Offensive Titiles"
 
Some don't understand the historic source of the terms used in
Freemasonry.  They complain of "offensive" titles such as Worshipful
Master for the leader of a Lodge.  This is simply a matter of
misunderstanding.  The leader of a Lodge is called the Master of the Lodge
for the same reason the leader of an orchestra is called a Concert Master,
or a highly skilled electrician is called a Master Electrician, or the
leader of a Scout troop is called a Scoutmaster.
 
Masonic use of the term Master originated in the guilds of the Middle Ages
when the person most skillful was called the Master.  Much Masonic
vocabulary dates from that period.  For instance "Worshipful" is a term
still used in England and Canada today to refer to such officials as
mayors of cities.  Worshipful John Doe means exactly the same thing as The
Honorable John Doe.
 
Also, in the John Wycliffe translation of the Bible, "Honor thy father and
Mother" is translated "Worchyp thy fadir and thy modir."  Some persons
seem not to distinguish between "worshipful" and "worshipable."  There is
certainly nothing irreligious in the title as used in Masonry.
 
"Archaic, Offensive Rituals"
 
Some object to the use of "archaic, offensive rituals" and that they term
"bloody oaths."  There is nothing offensive in Masonic rituals, at least
not to anyone who understands them.  They are ancient, many of them so old
their origins are long lost in history.  But there is nothing bad in that.
 Many creeds and statements of faith are far older than the Masonic
rituals.  The Lord's Prayer is 2,000 years old, but no one suggests it be
updated just because it was set down long ago.  The Declaration of
Independence is about the same age as the Master Mason degree, but few
complain that it is "archaic."
 
As to the allegedly "bloody oaths," the historic penalties associated with
the Masonic obligations have their origins in the legal system of medieval
Europe and were actual punishments inflicted by the state on persons
guilty of fighting for civil liberty and religious freedom.  Included in
the accused were many of the martyrs who died to secure the principle of
religious toleration.
 
In Masonry, these penalties are entirely symbolic.  They refer to the
shame a good man should feel at the thought he had broken a promise, and
they remind us of the price so many have paid for the liberties and
freedoms Masons are pledged to protect.
 
"Paganism"
 
Some critics of Freemasonry claim the recommended readings for some of the
degrees of Masonry are "pagan."  Pagan, as they are using the term, simply
means pre-Christian.  The study of man's moral and intellectual history
allows the achievement of Masonry's major purpose, the enhancement of an
individual's moral and intellectual development.  Such a study has to
start with the concepts of man and God as held by early cultures and
evidenced in their mythologies.  The Greeks and Romans, as well as earlier
peoples, had much of importance to say on many topics, including religion.
 The idea that a physician must act in the best interests of his patient
comes from the pagan Hippocrates, and the concept that the government
cannot break into your house and take what it wants on a whim comes from
the pagan Aristotle.  None of us would want to live in a world without
these ideas.
 
In almost every field - law, government, music, philosophy, mathematics,
etc. - it is necessary to review the work of early writers and thinkers. 
Masonry is no exception.  But to study the work of ancient cultures is not
the same thing as to do what they did or believe what they believed.  And
no Mason is ever told what he should believe in the matters of faith. 
This is not the task of a fraternity, nor a public library, nor the
government.  That is the duty of a person's revealed religion and is
appropriately expressed through his or her church.
 
The Bible as "Furniture"
 
Ironically, some people complain about the Bible in the lodge being
referred to in Masonic ritual as the "furniture of the lodge."  Again,
it's a matter of not understanding how Masons use the word.  Freemasons
use "furniture" in its original meaning of "essential equipment."  All
lodges must have a Volume of the Sacred Law open during every meeting.  In
North America, this is almost always the Bible which is and essential part
of Freemasonry and its ritual.
 
The Meaning of "Light"
 
Others critical of Freemasonry are concerned that when Masons use "light"
someone might think the word is referring to salvation rather than truth
or knowledge.  But that's a word confusion again.  Light was a symbol of
knowledge long before it was a symbol of salvation.  The lamp of learning
appears on almost every graduation card and college diploma.  Masonry uses
light as a symbol of the search for truth and knowledge.  It is very
unlikely any Mason would think Masonic "light" represents salvation.
 
"Salvation by Works"
 
Some believe Freemasonry teaches salvation may be attained by one's good
works.  Masonry does not teach any path to salvation.  That is the job of
a church, not a fraternity.  The closest Masonry comes to this issue is to
point to the open Bible and tell the Mason to search there for the path to
eternal life.
 
Masonry believes in the importance of doing good works, but as a matter of
gratitude to God for His many great gifts and as a matter of individual
moral and social responsibility.  The path to salvation is found in each
Mason's house of worship, not in his lodge.
 
"Universalism"
 
There are those who claim some Masonic writers teach the "heresy of
universalism."  Universalism is the doctrine that all men and women are
ultimately saved.  Masonry does not teach universalism nor any doctrine of
salvation.  Again, doctrines of salvation are the province of a church,
not a fraternity.  In point of fact, one has to look rather hard to find
those "many Masonic writers" who supposedly teach universalism, but even
if you could find one, he's writing a statement of personal opinion.  It's
important to remember that any Masonic author writes for himself alone,
not as an official of the Masonic fraternity.  Masonry simply does not
have a position, official or otherwise, on salvation.  Since men of all
faiths are welcome in Freemasonry, Masons are careful not to offend the
faith of any.  Possibly, that may seem to be universalism to some critics.
 Masons call is common courtesy.
 
Racial Exclusion
 
Some critics, more eager to attack Freemasonry than to put their own
houses in order, allege "most Lodges refuse to admit Africian-Americans as
members."  Masonry is not a whites-only organization, as the hundreds of
thousands of Black, Native American, Hispanic and Oriental Masons all over
the world can testify.  The petition for Masonic membership does not ask
the face of the petitioner, and it would be considered completely wrong to
do so.
 
At the international celebration of the 275th anniversary of the Grand
Lodge of England in 1992 (the most recent Masonic gathering of about the
same size as the Southern Baptist Convention) there were far more people
of color present than there were at the Southern Baptist Convention in
Houston in 1993.
 
At the same time, Masonry in America, like churches and society in
general, has not lived up to its teachings of brotherhood as well as it
should.  That is changing, in Masonry as well as in society.  While it is
still true, as Martin Luther King, Jr., remarked, "Sunday morning at 10:00
is still the most segregated hour in America," it's getting better
throughout all organizations.
 
Masonry Compatible with Christianity and Other Religions
 
Clearly, Freemasonry is compatible with religion.  It may be incompatible,
however, with the way a few narrowly focused people see religion.  Of
course, most of them feel that only they have the truth and even many
members of their own congregations are not as pure as they should be.
 
Masonry stands, as it has always stood, with open arms, saying, "Believe
as your conscience dictates, and if you are a good man who believes in God
and that there is something more to life than bread and circuses, if you
believe that you have a responsibility to develop yourself and to benefit
others, come join us."
 
Freemasonry is simply a fraternity - an organization of men banded
together to develop themselves further ethically and morally and to
benefit the community at large,  Give yourself a chance to find out who we
are.  We're the next-door neighbors you've known all your life.
 
=Published by the Masonic Information Center=
 
The Masonic Information Center is a division of The Masonic Service
Association.  The Center was founded in 1993 by a grant from John J.
Robinson, well-known author, speaker and Mason.  Its purpose is to provide
information on Freemasonry to Masons and non-Masons alike and to respond
to critics of Freemasonry.  The Center is directed by a Steering Committee
of distinguished Masons geographically representative of the Craft
throughout the United States and Canada.

    I just realized, in the context of the SOAP discussion so far, that
    .126 may be construed as to be a little too factual and not up to the
    standards of paranoia exhibited so far by those agreeing with the
    premise of the mid-west Bishop and the topic of 'excommunication'.
    I apologize for it's lack of entertainment value.

    Me old Dad, who is a City & Guilds Master Builder was approached by the
    Freemasons and invited to join.  (Become "on the level" as it's known).
    He declined as he sees the goals of Freemasonry to be inconsistent with
    those of his faith and religion.   He suddenly became eligible for
    early retirement after that.....

	I can always use masonary work done for free. These people should be
encouraged!

HUMANUM GENUS
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON FREEMASONRY APRIL 20, 1884
 
 
To the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, and Bishops of the Catholic
World in Grace and Communion with the Apostolic See.
 
The race of man, after its miserable fall from God, the Creator and the
Giver of heavenly gifts, "through the envy of the devil," separated into
two diverse and opposite parts, of which the one steadfastly contends for
truth and virtue, the other of those things which are contrary to virtue
and to truth. The one is the kingdom of God on earth, namely, the true
Church of Jesus Christ; and those who desire from their heart to be
united with it, so as to gain salvation, must of necessity serve God and
His only-begotten Son with their whole mind and with an entire will. The
other is the kingdom of Satan, in whose possession and control are all
whosoever follow the fatal example of their leader and of our first
parents, those who refuse to obey the divine and eternal law, and who
have many aims of their own in contempt of God, and many aims also
against God.
 
2. This twofold kingdom St. Augustine keenly discerned and described
after the manner of two cities, contrary in their laws because striving
for contrary objects; and with a subtle brevity he expressed the
efficient cause of each in these words: "Two loves formed two cities: the
love of self, reaching even to contempt of God, an earthly city; and the
love of God, reaching to contempt of self, a heavenly one."[1] At every
period of time each has been in conflict with the other, with a variety
and multiplicity of weapons and of warfare, although not always with
equal ardor and assault. At this period, however, the partisans of evil
seems to be combining together, and to be struggling with united
vehemence, led on or assisted by that strongly organized and widespread
association called the Freemasons. No longer making any secret of their
purposes, they are now boldly rising up against God Himself. They are
planning the destruction of holy Church publicly and openly, and this
with the set purpose of utterly despoiling the nations of Christendom, if
it were possible, of the blessings obtained for us through Jesus Christ
our Savior. Lamenting these evils, We are constrained by the charity
which urges Our heart to cry out often to God: "For lo, Thy enemies have
made a noise; and they that hate Thee have lifted up the head. They have
taken a malicious counsel against Thy people, and they have consulted
against Thy saints. They have said, 'come, and let us destroy them, so
that they be not a nation'."[2]
 
3. At so urgent a crisis, when so fierce and so pressing an onslaught is
made upon the Christian name, it is Our office to point out the danger,
to mark who are the adversaries, and to the best of Our power to make
head against their plans and devices, that those may not perish whose
salvation is committed to Us, and that the kingdom of Jesus Christ
entrusted to Our charge may not stand and remain whole, but may be
enlarged by an ever-increasing growth throughout the world.
 
4. The Roman Pontiffs Our predecessors, in their incessant watchfulness
over the safety of the Christian people, were prompt in detecting the
presence and the purpose of this capital enemy immediately it sprang into
the light instead of hiding as a dark conspiracy; and, moreover, they
took occasion with true foresight to give, as it were on their guard, and
not allow themselves to be caught by the devices and snares laid out to
deceive them.
 
5. The first warning of the danger was given by Clement XII in the year
1738,[3] and his constitution was confirmed and renewed by Benedict
XIV.[4] Pius VII followed the same path;[5] and Leo XII, by his apostolic
constitution, Quo Graviora,[6] put together the acts and decrees of
former Pontiffs on this subject, and ratified and confirmed them forever.
In the same sense spoke Pius VIII,[7] Gregory XVI,[8] and, many times
over, Pius IX.[9]
 
6. For as soon as the constitution and the spirit of the masonic sect
were clearly discovered by manifest signs of its actions, by the
investigation of its causes, by publication of its laws, and of its rites
and commentaries, with the addition often of the personal testimony of
those who were in the secret, this apostolic see denounced the sect of
the Freemasons, and publicly declared its constitution, as contrary to
law and right, to be pernicious no less to Christendom than to the State;
and it forbade any one to enter the society, under the penalties which
the Church is wont to inflict upon exceptionally guilty persons. The
sectaries, indignant at this, thinking to elude or to weaken the force of
these decrees, partly by contempt of them, and partly by calumny, accused
the sovereign Pontiffs who had passed them either of exceeding the bounds
of moderation in their decrees or of decreeing what was not just. This
was the manner in which they endeavored to elude the authority and the
weight of the apostolic constitutions of Clement XII and Benedict XIV, as
well as of Pius VII and Pius IX.[10] Yet, in the very society itself,
there were to be found men who unwillingly acknowledged that the Roman
Pontiffs had acted within their right, according to the Catholic doctrine
and discipline. The Pontiffs received the same assent, and in strong
terms, from many princes and heads of governments, who made it their
business either to delate the masonic society to the apostolic see, or of
their own accord by special enactments to brand it as pernicious, as, for
example, in Holland, Austria, Switzerland, Spain, Bavaria, Savoy, and
other parts of Italy.
 
7. But, what is of highest importance, the course of events has
demonstrated the prudence of Our predecessors. For their provident and
paternal solicitude had not always and every where the result desired;
and this, either because of the simulation and cunning of some who were
active agents in the mischief, or else of the thoughtless levity of the
rest who ought, in their own interest, to have given to the matter their
diligent attention. In consequence, the sect of Freemasons grew with a
rapidity beyond conception in the course of a century and a half, until
it came to be able, by means of fraud or of audacity, to gain such
entrance into every rank of the State as to seem to be almost its ruling
power. This swift and formidable advance has brought upon the Church,
upon the power of princes, upon the public well-being, precisely that
grievous harm which Our predecessors had long before foreseen. Such a
condition has been reached that henceforth there will be grave reason to
fear, not indeed for the Church--for her foundation is much too firm to
be overturned by the effort of men--but for those States in which
prevails the power, either of the sect of which we are speaking or of
other sects not dissimilar which lend themselves to it as disciples and
subordinates.
 
8. For these reasons We no sooner came to the helm of the Church than We
clearly saw and felt it to be Our duty to use Our authority to the very
utmost against so vast an evil. We have several times already, as
occasion served, attacked certain chief points of teaching which showed
in a special manner the perverse influence of Masonic opinions. Thus, in
Our encyclical letter, Quod Apostolici Muneris, We endeavored to refute
the monstrous doctrines of the socialists and communists; afterwards, in
another beginning "Arcanum," We took pains to defend and explain the true
and genuine idea of domestic life, of which marriage is the spring and
origin; and again, in that which begins "Diuturnum,"[11] We described the
ideal of political government conformed to the principles of Christian
wisdom, which is marvelously in harmony, on the one hand, with the
natural order of things, and, in the other, with the well-being of both
sovereign princes and of nations. It is now Our intention, following the
example of Our predecessors, directly to treat of the masonic society
itself, of its whole teaching, of its aims, and of its manner of thinking
and acting, in order to bring more and more into the light its power for
evil, and to do what We can to arrest the contagion of this fatal plague.
 
9. There are several organized bodies which, though differing in name, in
ceremonial, in form and origin, are nevertheless so bound together by
community of purpose and by the similarity of their main opinions, as to
make in fact one thing with the sect of the Freemasons, which is a kind
of center whence they all go forth, and whither they all return. Now,
these no longer show a desire to remain concealed; for they hold their
meetings in the daylight and before the public eye, and publish their own
newspaper organs; and yet, when thoroughly understood, they are found
still to retain the nature and the habits of secret societies. There are
many things like mysteries which it is the fixed rule to hide with
extreme care, not only from strangers, but from very many members, also;
such as their secret and final designs, the names of the chief leaders,
and certain secret and inner meetings, as well as their decisions, and
the ways and means of carrying them out. This is, no doubt, the object of
the manifold difference among the members as to right, office, and
privilege, of the received distinction of orders and grades, and of that
severe discipline which is maintained.
 
Candidates are generally commanded to promise--nay, with a special oath,
to swear--that they will never, to any person, at any time or in any way,
make known the members, the passes, or the subjects discussed. Thus, with
a fraudulent external appearance, and with a style of simulation which is
always the same, the Freemasons, like the Manichees of old, strive, as
far as possible, to conceal themselves, and to admit no witnesses but
their own members. As a convenient manner of concealment, they assume the
character of literary men and scholars associated for purposes of
learning. They speak of their zeal for a more cultured refinement, and of
their love for the poor; and they declare their one wish to be the
amelioration of the condition of the masses, and to share with the
largest possible number all the benefits of civil life. Were these
purposes aimed at in real truth, they are by no means the whole of their
object. Moreover, to be enrolled, it is necessary that the candidates
promise and undertake to be thenceforward strictly obedient to their
leaders and masters with the utmost submission and fidelity, and to be in
readiness to do their bidding upon the slightest expression of their
will; or, if disobedient, to submit to the direst penalties and death
itself. As a fact, if any are judged to have betrayed the doings of the
sect or to have resisted commands given, punishment is inflicted on them
not infrequently, and with so much audacity and dexterity that the
assassin very often escapes the detection and penalty of his crime.
 
10. But to simulate and wish to lie hid; to bind men like slaves in the
very tightest bonds, and without giving any sufficient reason; to make
use of men enslaved to the will of another for any arbitrary act; to arm
men's right hands for bloodshed after securing impunity for the
crime--all this is an enormity from which nature recoils. Wherefore,
reason and truth itself make it plain that the society of which we are
speaking is in antagonism with justice and natural uprightness. And this
becomes still plainer, inasmuch as other arguments, also, and those very
manifest, prove that it is essentially opposed to natural virtue. For, no
matter how great may be men's cleverness in concealing and their
experience in Iying, it is impossible to prevent the effects of any cause
from showing, in some way, the intrinsic nature of the cause whence they
come. "A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor a bad tree produce good
fruit."[12] Now, the masonic sect produces fruits that are pernicious and
of the bitterest savor. For, from what We have above most clearly shown,
that which is their ultimate purpose forces itself into view--namely, the
utter overthrow of that whole religious and political order of the world
which the Christian teaching has produced, and the substitution of a new
state of things in accordance with their ideas, of which the foundations
and laws shall be drawn from mere naturalism.
 
11. What We have said, and are about to say, must be understood of the
sect of the Freemasons taken generically, and in so far as it comprises
the associations kindred to it and confederated with it, but not of the
individual members of them. There may be persons amongst these, and not a
few who, although not free from the guilt of having entangled themselves
in such associations, yet are neither themselves partners in their
criminal acts nor aware of the ultimate object which they are endeavoring
to attain. In the same way, some of the affiliated societies, perhaps, by
no means approve of the extreme conclusions which they would, if
consistent, embrace as necessarily following from their common
principles, did not their very foulness strike them with horror. Some of
these, again, are led by circumstances of times and places either to aim
at smaller things than the others usually attempt or than they themselves
would wish to attempt. They are not, however, for this reason, to be
reckoned as alien to the masonic federation; for the masonic federation
is to be judged not so much by the things which it has done, or brought
to completion, as by the sum of its pronounced opinions.
 
12. Now, the fundamental doctrine of the naturalists, which they
sufficiently make known by their very name, is that human nature and
human reason ought in all things to be mistress and guide. Laying this
down, they care little for duties to God, or pervert them by erroneous
and vague opinions. For they deny that anything has been taught by God;
they allow no dogma of religion or truth which cannot be understood by
the human intelligence, nor any teacher who ought to be believed by
reason of his authority. And since it is the special and exclusive duty
of the Catholic Church fully to set forth in words truths divinely
received, to teach, besides other divine helps to salvation, the
authority of its office, and to defend the same with perfect purity, it
is against the Church that the rage and attack of the enemies are
principally directed.
 
13. In those matters which regard religion let it be seen how the sect of
the Freemasons acts, especially where it is more free to act without
restraint, and then let any one judge whether in fact it does not wish to
carry out the policy of the naturalists. By a long and persevering labor,
they endeavor to bring about this result--namely, that the teaching
office and authority of the Church may become of no account in the civil
State; and for this same reason they declare to the people and contend
that Church and State ought to be altogether disunited. By this means
they reject from the laws and from the commonwealth the wholesome
influence of the Catholic religion; and they consequently imagine that
States ought to be constituted without any regard for the laws and
precepts of the Church.
 
14. Nor do they think it enough to disregard the Church--the best of
guides--unless they also injure it by their hostility. Indeed, with them
it is lawful to attack with impunity the very foundations of the Catholic
religion, in speech, in writing, and in teaching; and even the rights of
the Church are not spared, and the offices with which it is divinely
invested are not safe. The least possible liberty to manage affairs is
left to the Church; and this is done by laws not apparently very hostile,
but in reality framed and fitted to hinder freedom of action. Moreover,
We see exceptional and onerous laws imposed upon the clergy, to the end
that they may be continually diminished in number and in necessary means.
We see also the remnants of the possessions of the Church fettered by the
strictest conditions, and subjected to the power and arbitrary will of
the administrators of the State, and the religious orders rooted up and
scattered.
 
15. But against the apostolic see and the Roman Pontiff the contention of
these enemies has been for a long time directed. The Pontiff was first,
for specious reasons, thrust out from the bulwark of his liberty and of
his right, the civil princedom; soon, he was unjustly driven into a
condition which was unbearable because of the difficulties raised on all
sides; and now the time has come when the partisans of the sects openly
declare, what in secret among themselves they have for a long time
plotted, that the sacred power of the Pontiffs must be abolished, and
that the papacy itself, founded by divine right, must be utterly
destroyed. If other proofs were wanting, this fact would be sufficiently
disclosed by the testimony of men well informed, of whom some at other
times, and others again recently, have declared it to be true of the
Freemasons that they especially desire to assail the Church with
irreconcilable hostility, and that they will never rest until they have
destroyed whatever the supreme Pontiffs have established for the sake of
religion.
 
16. If those who are admitted as members are not commanded to abjure by
any form of words the Catholic doctrines, this omission, so far from
being adverse to the designs of the Freemasons is more useful for their
purposes. First, in this way they easily deceive the simple-minded and
the heedless, and can induce a far greater number to become members.
Again, as all who offer themselves are received whatever may be their
form of religion, they thereby teach the great error of this age--that a
regard for religion should be held as an indifferent matter, and that all
religions are alike. This manner of reasoning is calculated to bring
about the ruin of all forms of religion, and especially of the Catholic
religion, which, as it is the only one that is true, cannot, without
great injustice, be regarded as merely equal to other religions.
 
17. But the naturalists go much further; for, having, in the highest
things, entered upon a wholly erroneous course, they are carried headlong
to extremes, either by reason of the weakness of human nature, or because
God inflicts upon them the just punishment of their pride. Hence it
happens that they no longer consider as certain and permanent those
things which are fully understood by the natural light of reason, such as
certainly are--the existence of God, the immaterial nature of the human
soul, and its immortality. The sect of the Freemasons, by a similar
course of error, is exposed to these same dangers; for, although in a
general way they may profess the existence of God, they themselves are
witnesses that they do not all maintain this truth with the full assent
of the mind or with a firm conviction. Neither do they conceal that this
question about God is the greatest source and cause of discords among
them; in fact, it is certain that a considerable contention about this
same subject has existed among them very lately. But, indeed, the sect
allows great liberty to its votaries, so that to each side is given the
right to defend its own opinion, either that there is a God, or that
there is none; and those who obstinately contend that there is no God are
as easily initiated as those who contend that God exists, though, like
the pantheists, they have false notions concerning Him: all which is
nothing else than taking away the reality, while retaining some absurd
representation of the divine nature.
 
18. When this greatest fundamental truth has been overturned or weakened,
it follows that those truths, also, which are known by the teaching of
nature must begin to fall--namely, that all things were made by the free
will of God the Creator; that the world is governed by Providence; that
souls do not die; that to this life of men upon the earth there will
succeed another and an everlasting life.
 
19. When these truths are done away with, which are as the principles of
nature and important for knowledge and for practical use, it is easy to
see what will become of both public and private morality. We say nothing
of those more heavenly virtues, which no one can exercise or even acquire
without a special gift and grace of God; of which necessarily no trace
can be found in those who reject as unknown the redemption of mankind,
the grace of God, the sacraments, and the happiness to be obtained in
heaven. We speak now of the duties which have their origin in natural
probity. That God is the Creator of the world and its provident Ruler;
that the eternal law commands the natural order to be maintained, and
forbids that it be disturbed; that the last end of men is a destiny far
above human things and beyond this sojourning upon the earth: these are
the sources and these the principles of all justice and morality.
 
If these be taken away, as the naturalists and Freemasons desire, there
will immediately be no knowledge as to what constitutes justice and
injustice, or upon what principle morality is founded. And, in truth, the
teaching of morality which alone finds favor with the sect of Freemasons,
and in which they contend that youth should be instructed, is that which
they call "civil," and "independent," and "free," namely, that which does
not contain any religious belief. But, how insufficient such teaching is,
how wanting in soundness, and how easily moved by every impulse of
passion, is sufficiently proved by its sad fruits, which have already
begun to appear. For, wherever, by removing Christian education, this
teaching has begun more completely to rule, there goodness and integrity
of morals have begun quickly to perish, monstrous and shameful opinions
have grown up, and the audacity of evil deeds has risen to a high degree.
All this is commonly complained of and deplored; and not a few of those
who by no means wish to do so are compelled by abundant evidence to give
not infrequently the same testimony.
 
20. Moreover, human nature was stained by original sin, and is therefore
more disposed to vice than to virtue. For a virtuous life it is
absolutely necessary to restrain the disorderly movements of the soul,
and to make the passions obedient to reason. In this conflict human
things must very often be despised, and the greatest labors and hardships
must be undergone, in order that reason may always hold its sway. But the
naturalists and Freemasons, having no faith in those things which we have
learned by the revelation of God, deny that our first parents sinned, and
consequently think that free will is not at all weakened and inclined to
evil.[13] On the contrary, exaggerating rather the power and the
excellence of nature, and placing therein alone the principle and rule of
justice, they cannot even imagine that there is any need at all of a
constant struggle and a perfect steadfastness to overcome the violence
and rule of our passions.
 
Wherefore we see that men are publicly tempted by the many allurements of
pleasure; that there are journals and pamphlets with neither moderation
nor shame; that stage-plays are remarkable for license; that designs for
works of art are shamelessly sought in the laws of a so-called verism;
that the contrivances of a soft and delicate life are most carefully
devised; and that all the blandishments of pleasure are diligently sought
out by which virtue may be lulled to sleep. Wickedly, also, but at the
same time quite consistently, do those act who do away with the
expectation of the joys of heaven, and bring down all happiness to the
level of mortality, and, as it were, sink it in the earth. Of what We
have said the following fact, astonishing not so much in itself as in its
open expression, may serve as a confirmation. For, since generally no one
is accustomed to obey crafty and clever men so submissively as those
whose soul is weakened and broken down by the domination of the passions,
there have been in the sect of the Freemasons some who have plainly
determined and proposed that, artfully and of set purpose, the multitude
should be satiated with a boundless license of vice, as, when this had
been done, it would easily come under their power and authority for any
acts of daring.
 
21. What refers to domestic life in the teaching of the naturalists is
almost all contained in the following declarations: that marriage belongs
to the genus of commercial contracts, which can rightly be revoked by the
will of those who made them, and that the civil rulers of the State have
power over the matrimonial bond; that in the education of youth nothing
is to be taught in the matter of religion as of certain and fixed
opinion; and each one must be left at liberty to follow, when he comes of
age, whatever he may prefer. To these things the Freemasons fully assent;
and not only assent, but have long endeavored to make them into a law and
institution. For in many countries, and those nominally Catholic, it is
enacted that no marriages shall be considered lawful except those
contracted by the civil rite; in other places the law permits divorce;
and in others every effort is used to make it lawful as soon as may be.
Thus, the time is quickly coming when marriages will be turned into
another kind of contract--that is into changeable and uncertain unions
which fancy may join together, and which the same when changed may
disunite.
 
With the greatest unanimity the sect of the Freemasons also endeavors to
take to itself the education of youth. They think that they can easily
mold to their opinions that soft and pliant age, and bend it whither they
will; and that nothing can be more fitted than this to enable them to
bring up the youth of the State after their own plan. Therefore, in the
education and instruction of children they allow no share, either of
teaching or of discipline, to the ministers of the Church; and in many
places they have procured that the education of youth shall be
exclusively in the hands of laymen, and that nothing which treats of the
most important and most holy duties of men to God shall be introduced
into the instructions on morals.
 
22. Then come their doctrines of politics, in which the naturalists lay
down that all men have the same right, and are in every respect of equal
and like condition; that each one is naturally free; that no one has the
right to command another; that it is an act of violence to require men to
obey any authority other than that which is obtained from themselves.
According to this, therefore, all things belong to the free people; power
is held by the command or permission of the people, so that, when the
popular will changes, rulers may lawfully be deposed and the source of
all rights and civil duties is either in the multitude or in the
governing authority when this is constituted according to the latest
doctrines. It is held also that the State should be without God; that in
the various forms of religion there is no reason why one should have
precedence of another; and that they are all to occupy the same place.
 
23. That these doctrines are equally acceptable to the Freemasons, and
that they would wish to constitute States according to this example and
model, is too well known to require proof. For some time past they have
openly endeavored to bring this about with all their strength and
resources; and in this they prepare the way for not a few bolder men who
are hurrying on even to worse things, in their endeavor to obtain
equality and community of all goods by the destruction of every
distinction of rank and property.
 
24. What, therefore, sect of the Freemasons is, and what course it
pursues, appears sufficiently from the summary We have briefly given.
Their chief dogmas are so greatly and manifestly at variance with reason
that nothing can be more perverse. To wish to destroy the religion and
the Church which God Himself has established, and whose perpetuity He
insures by His protection, and to bring back after a lapse of eighteen
centuries the manners and customs of the pagans, is signal folly and
audacious impiety. Neither is it less horrible nor more tolerable that
they should repudiate the benefits which Jesus Christ so mercifully
obtained, not only for individuals, but also for the family and for civil
society, benefits which, even according to the judgment and testimony of
enemies of Christianity, are very great. In this insane and wicked
endeavor we may almost see the implacable hatred and spirit of revenge
with which Satan himself is inflamed against Jesus Christ.--So also the
studious endeavor of the Freemasons to destroy the chief foundations of
justice and honesty, and to co-operate with those who would wish, as if
they were mere animals, to do what they please, tends only to the
ignominious and disgraceful ruin of the human race.
 
The evil, too, is increased by the dangers which threaten both domestic
and civil society. As We have elsewhere shown, in marriage, according to
the belief of almost every nation, there is something sacred and
religious; and the law of God has determined that marriages shall not be
dissolved. If they are deprived of their sacred character, and made
dissoluble, trouble and confusion in the family will be the result, the
wife being deprived of her dignity and the children left without
protection as to their interests and well being.--To have in public
matters no care for religion, and in the arrangement and administration
of civil affairs to have no more regard for God than if He did not exist,
is a rashness unknown to the very pagans; for in their heart and soul the
notion of a divinity and the need of public religion were so firmly fixed
that they would have thought it easier to have city without foundation
than a city without God. Human society, indeed for which by nature we are
formed, has been constituted by God the Author of nature; and from Him,
as from their principle and source, flow in all their strength and
permanence the countless benefits with which society abounds. As we are
each of us admonished by the very voice of nature to worship God in piety
and holiness, as the Giver unto us of life and of all that is good
therein, so also and for the same reason, nations and States are bound to
worship Him; and therefore it is clear that those who would absolve
society from all religious duty act not only unjustly but also with
ignorance and folly.
 
25. As men are by the will of God born for civil union and society, and
as the power to rule is so necessary a bond of society that, if it be
taken away, society must at once be broken up, it follows that from Him
who is the Author of society has come also the authority to rule; so that
whosoever rules, he is the minister of God. Wherefore, as the end and
nature of human society so requires, it is right to obey the just
commands of lawful authority, as it is right to obey God who ruleth all
things; and it is most untrue that the people have it in their power to
cast aside their obedience whensoever they please.
 
26. In like manner, no one doubts that all men are equal one to another,
so far as regards their common origin and nature, or the last end which
each one has to attain, or the rights and duties which are thence
derived. But, as the abilities of all are not equal, as one differs from
another in the powers of mind or body, and as there are very many
dissimilarities of manner, disposition, and character, it is most
repugnant to reason to endeavor to confine all within the same measure,
and to extend complete equality to the institutions of civil life. Just
as a perfect condition of the body results from the conjunction and
composition of its various members, which, though differing in form and
purpose, make, by their union and the distribution of each one to its
proper place, a combination beautiful to behold, firm in strength, and
necessary for use; so, in the commonwealth, there is an almost infinite
dissimilarity of men, as parts of the whole. If they are to be all equal,
and each is to follow his own will, the State will appear most deformed;
but if, with a distinction of degrees of dignity, of pursuits and
employments, all aptly conspire for the common good, they will present
the image of a State both well constituted and conformable to nature.
 
27. Now, from the disturbing errors which We have described the greatest
dangers to States are to be feared. For, the fear of God and reverence
for divine laws being taken away, the authority of rulers despised,
sedition permitted and approved, and the popular passions urged on to
lawlessness, with no restraint save that of punishment, a change and
overthrow of all things will necessarily follow. Yea, this change and
overthrow is deliberately planned and put forward by many associations of
communists and socialists; and to their undertakings the sect of
Freemasons is not hostile, but greatly favors their designs, and holds in
common with them their chief opinions. And if these men do not at once
and everywhere endeavor to carry out their extreme views, it is not to be
attributed to their teaching and their will, but to the virtue of that
divine religion which cannot be destroyed; and also because the sounder
part of men, refusing to be enslaved to secret societies, vigorously
resist their insane attempts.
 
28. Would that all men would judge of the tree by its fruit, and would
acknowledge the seed and origin of the evils which press upon us, and of
the dangers that are impending! We have to deal with a deceitful and
crafty enemy, who, gratifying the ears of people and of princes, has
ensnared them by smooth speeches and by adulation. Ingratiating
themselves with rulers under a pretense of friendship, the Freemasons
have endeavored to make them their allies and powerful helpers for the
destruction of the Christian name; and that they might more strongly urge
them on, they have, with determined calumny, accused the Church of
invidiously contending with rulers in matters that affect their authority
and sovereign power. Having, by these artifices, insured their own safety
and audacity, they have begun to exercise great weight in the government
of States: but nevertheless they are prepared to shake the foundations of
empires, to harass the rulers of the State, to accuse, and to cast them
out, as often as they appear to govern otherwise than they themselves
could have wished. In like manner, they have by flattery deluded the
people. Proclaiming with a loud voice liberty and public prosperity, and
saying that it was owing to the Church and to sovereigns that the
multitude were not drawn out of their unjust servitude and poverty, they
have imposed upon the people, and, exciting them by a thirst for novelty,
they have urged them to assail both the Church and the civil power.
Nevertheless, the expectation of the benefits which was hoped for is
greater than the reality; indeed, the common people, more oppressed than
they were before, are deprived in their misery of that solace which, if
things had been arranged in a Christian manner, they would have had with
ease and in abundance. But, whoever strive against the order which Divine
Providence has constituted pay usually the penalty of their pride, and
meet with affliction and misery where they rashly hoped to find all
things prosperous and in conformity with their desires.
 
29. The Church, if she directs men to render obedience chiefly and above
all to God the sovereign Lord, is wrongly and falsely believed either to
be envious of the civil power or to arrogate to herself something of the
rights of sovereigns. On the contrary, she teaches that what is rightly
due to the civil power must be rendered to it with a conviction and
consciousness of duty. In teaching that from God Himself comes the right
of ruling, she adds a great dignity to civil authority, and on small help
towards obtaining the obedience and good will of the citizens. The friend
of peace and sustainer of concord, she embraces all with maternal love,
and, intent only upon giving help to mortal man, she teaches that to
justice must be joined clemency, equity to authority, and moderation to
lawgiving; that no one's right must be violated; that order and public
tranquillity are to be maintained and that the poverty of those are in
need is, as far as possible, to be relieved by public and private
charity. "But for this reason," to use the words of St. Augustine, "men
think, or would have it believed, that Christian teaching is not suited
to the good of the State; for they wish the State to be founded not on
solid virtue, but on the impunity of vice."[14] Knowing these things,
both princes and people would act with poitical wisdom,[15] and according
to the needs of general safety, if, instead of joining with Freemasons to
destroy the Church, they joined with the Church in repelling their
attacks.
 
30 .Whatever the future may be, in this grave and widespread evil it is
Our duty, venerable brethren, to endeavor to find a remedy. And because
We know that Our best and firmest hope of a remedy is in the power of
that divine religion which the Freemasons hate in proportion to their
fear of it, We think it to be of chief importance to call that most
saving power to Our aid against the common enemy. Therefore, whatsoever
the Roman Pontiffs Our predecessors have decreed for the purpose of
opposing the undertakings and endeavors of the masonic sect, and
whatsoever they have enacted to enter or withdraw men from societies of
this kind, We ratify and confirm it all by our apostolic authority: and
trusting greatly to the good will of Christians, We pray and beseech each
one, for the sake of his eternal salvation, to be most conscientiously
careful not in the least to depart from what the apostolic see has
commanded in this matter.
 
31. We pray and beseech you, venerable brethren, to join your efforts
with Ours, and earnestly to strive for the extirpation of this foul
plague, which is creeping through the veins of the body politic. You have
to defend the glory of God and the salvation of your neighbor; and with
the object of your strife before you, neither courage nor strength will
be wanting. It will be for your prudence to judge by what means you can
best overcome the difficulties and obstacles you meet with. But, as it
befits the authority of Our office that We Ourselves should point out
some suitable way of proceeding, We wish it to be your rule first of all
to tear away the mask from Freemasonry, and to let it be seen as it
really is; and by sermons and pastoral letters to instruct the people as
to the artifices used by societies of this kind in seducing men and
enticing them into their ranks, and as to the depravity of their opinions
and the wickedness of their acts. As Our predecessors have many times
repeated, let no man think that he may for any reason whatsoever join the
masonic sect, if he values his Catholic name and his eternal salvation as
he ought to value them. Let no one be deceived by a pretense of honesty.
It may seem to some that Freemasons demand nothing that is openly
contrary to religion and morality; but, as the whole principle and object
of the sect lies in what is vicious and criminal, to join with these men
or in any way to help them cannot be lawful.
 
32. Further, by assiduous teaching and exhortation, the multitude must be
drawn to learn diligently the precepts of religion; for which purpose we
earnestly advise that by opportune writings and sermons they be taught
the elements of those sacred truths in which Christian philosophy is
contained. The result of this will be that the minds of men will be made
sound by instruction, and will be protected against many forms of error
and inducements to wickedness, especially in the present unbounded
freedom of writing and insatiable eagerness for learning.
 
33. Great, indeed, is the work; but in it the clergy will share your
labors, if, through your care, they are fitted for it by learning and a
well-turned life. This good and great work requires to be helped also by
the industry of those amongst the laity in whom a love of religion and of
country is joined to learning and goodness of life. By uniting the
efforts of both clergy and laity, strive, venerable brethren, to make men
thoroughly know and love the Church; for, the greater their knowledge and
love of the Church, the more will they be turned away from clandestine
societies.
 
34. Wherefore, not without cause do We use this occasion to state again
what We have stated elsewhere, namely, that the Third Order of St.
Francis, whose discipline We a little while ago prudently mitigated,[16]
 should be studiously promoted and sustained; for the whole object of
this Order, as constituted by its founder, is to invite men to an
imitation of Jesus Christ, to a love of the Church, and to the observance
of all Christian virtues; and therefore it ought to be of great influence
in suppressing the contagion of wicked societies. Let, therefore, this
holy sodality be strengthened by a daily increase. Amongst the many
benefits to be expected from it will be the great benefit of drawing the
minds of men to liberty, fraternity, and equality of right; not such as
the Freemasons absurdly imagine, but such as Jesus Christ obtained for
the human race and St. Francis aspired to: the liberty, We mean, of sons
of God, through which we may be free from slavery to Satan or to our
passions, both of them most wicked masters; the fraternity whose origin
is in God, the common Creator and Father of all; the equality which,
founded on justice and charity, does not take away all distinctions among
men, but, out of the varieties of life, of duties, and of pursuits, forms
that union and that harmony which naturally tend to the benefit and
dignity of society.
 
35. In the third place, there is a matter wisely instituted by our
forefathers, but in course of time laid aside, which may now be used as a
pattern and form of something similar. We mean the associations of guilds
of workmen, for the protection, under the guidance of religion, both of
their temporal interests and of their morality. If our ancestors, by long
use and experience, felt the benefit of these guilds, our age perhaps
will feel it the more by reason of the opportunity which they will give
of crushing the power of the sects. Those who support themselves by the
labor of their hands, besides being, by their very condition, most worthy
above all others of charity and consolation, are also especially exposed
to the allurements of men whose ways lie in fraud and deceit. Therefore,
they ought to be helped with the greatest possible kindness, and to be
invited to join associations that are good, lest they be drawn away to
others that are evil. For this reason, We greatly wish, for the salvation
of the people, that, under the auspices and patronage of the bishops, and
at convenient times, these gilds may be generally restored. To Our great
delight, sodalities of this kind and also associations of masters have in
many places already been established, having, each class of them, for
their object to help the honest workman, to protect and guard his
children and family, and to promote in them piety, Christian knowledge,
and a moral life. And in this matter We cannot omit mentioning that
exemplary society, named after its founder, St. Vincent, which has
deserved so well of the lower classes. Its acts and its aims are well
known. Its whole object is to give relief to the poor and miserable. This
it does with singular prudence and modesty; and the less it wishes to be
seen, the better is it fitted for the exercise of Christian charity, and
for the relief of suffering.
 
36. In the fourth place, in order more easily to attain what We wish, to
your fidelity and watchfulness We commend in a special manner the young,
as being the hope of human society. Devote the greatest part of your care
to their instruction; and do not think that any precaution can be great
enough in keeping them from masters and schools whence the pestilent
breath of the sects is to be feared. Under your guidance, let parents,
religious instructors, and priests having the cure of souls use every
opportunity, in their Christian teaching, of warning their children and
pupils of the infamous nature of these societies, so that they may learn
in good time to beware of the various and fraudulent artifices by which
their promoters are accustomed to ensnare people. And those who instruct
the young in religious knowledge will act wisely if they induce all of
them to resolve and to undertake never to bind themselves to any society
without the knowledge of their parents, or the advice of their parish
priest or director.
 
37. We well know, however, that our united labors will by no means
suffice to pluck up these pernicious seeds from the Lord's field, unless
the Heavenly Master of the vineyard shall mercifully help us in our
endeavors. We must, therefore, with great and anxious care, implore of
Him the help which the greatness of the danger and of the need requires.
The sect of the Freemasons shows itself insolent and proud of its
success, and seems as if it would put no bounds to its pertinacity. Its
followers, joined together by a wicked compact and by secret counsels,
give help one to another, and excite one another to an audacity for evil
things. So vehement an attack demands an equal defense--namely, that all
good men should form the widest possible association of action and of
prayer. We beseech them, therefore, with united hearts, to stand together
and unmoved against the advancing force of the sects; and in mourning and
supplication to stretch out their hands to God, praying that the
Christian name may flourish and prosper, that the Church may enjoy its
needed liberty, that those who have gone astray may return to a right
mind, that error at length may give place to truth, and vice to virtue.
Let us take our helper and intercessor the Virgin Mary, Mother of God, so
that she, who from the moment of her conception overcame Satan may show
her power over these evil sects, in which is revived the contumacious
spirit of the demon, together with his unsubdued perfidy and deceit. Let
us beseech Michael, the prince of the heavenly angels, who drove out the
infernal foe; and Joseph, the spouse of the most holy Virgin, and
heavenly patron of the Catholic Church; and the great Apostles, Peter and
Paul, the fathers and victorious champions of the Christian faith. By
their patronage, and by perseverance in united prayer, we hope that God
will mercifully and opportunely succor the human race, which is
encompassed by so many dangers.
 
38. As a pledge of heavenly gifts and of Our benevolence, We lovingly
grant in the Lord, to you, venerable brethren, and to the clergy and all
the people committed to your watchful care, Our apostolic benediction.
 
Given at St. Peter's in Rome, the twentieth day of April, 1884, the sixth
year of Our pontificate.
 
 
 
REFERENCES:
 
1. De civ. Dei, 14, 28 (PL 41, 436).
 
2. Ps. 82:24.
 
3. Const. In Eminenti, April 24, 1738.
 
4. Const. Providas, May 18, 1751.
 
5. Const. Ecclesiam a Jesu Christo, Sept. 13, 1821.
 
6. Const. given March 13, 1825.
 
7. Encyc. Traditi, May 21, 1829.
 
8. Encyc. Mirari, August 15, 1832.
 
9. Encyc. Qui Pluribus, Nov. 9, 1846; address Multiplices inter, Sept.
25, 1865. etc.
 
10. Clement Xll (1730-40); Benedict XIV (1740-58), Pius Vll
(1800-23);Pius IX (1846-78).
 
11. See nos. 79, 81, 84.
 
12. Matt. 7:18.
 
13. Trid., sess. vi, De justif, c. 1. Text of the Council of Trent:
"tametsi in eis (sc. Judaeis) liberum arbitrium minime extinctum esset,
viribus licet attenuatum et inclinatum. "
 
14. See Arcanum, no. 81.
 
15. Epistola 137, ad Volusianum, c. v, n. 20 (PL 33, 525).
 
16.(Sept. 17, 1882), in which Pope Leo XIII had recently glorified St.
Francis of Assisi on the occasion of the seventh centenary of his birth.
In this encyclical, the Pope had presented the Third Order of St. Francis
as a Christian answer to the social problems of the times. The
constitution Misericors Dei filius (June 23, 1883) expressly recalled
that the neglect in which Christian virtues are held is the main cause of
the evils that threaten societies. In confirming the rule of the Third
Order and adapting it to the needs of modern times, Pope Leo Xlll had
intended to bring back the largest possible number of souls to the
practice of these virtues.

    
    
    	
    How to understand .130
    
    Risorgimento
    
    Risorgimento  (r�-s�r'j�-m�n't�), period of cultural nationalism and
    political activism in the 19th cent. that led to the unification of
    Italy. Italy was fragmented in the Middle Ages, and from the 16th to
    18th cent. foreign influence was virtually complete. After the
    Napoleonic wars, revolutionary groups such as the Carbonari emerged.
    The literature of Alessandro MANZONI, Ugo FOSCOLO, and others
    stimulated nationalism. Political activity was carried on by three
    groups. Giuseppe MAZZINI led the radicals, who were republican and
    anticlerical. The conservative and clerical faction generally advocated
    a federation headed by the pope. The moderates favored unification
    under the house of SAVOY, which ruled Sardinia. Sardinia assumed
    leadership of the Risorgimento in 1848 when revolts broke out across
    Italy. King Charles Albert of Sardinia tried to drive the Austrians out
    of N Italy but was defeated at Custoza (1848) and Novara (1849), and
    abdicated. Revolutions elsewhere were suppressed, including one at
    Rome, where *Mazzini* had formed a short-lived republic. The liberal
    movement, however, gradually coalesced around Charles Albert's son and
    successor, VICTOR EMMANUEL II, and his minister, the conte di CAVOUR.
    Cavour sought and received French aid against Austria, but the battles
    (1859) of Magenta and Solferino were so costly that the French signed a
    separate armistice. Austria retained Venetia, and Sardinia gained only
    Lombardy. In 1860 Tuscany, Modena, Parma, Bologna, and the Romagna
    voted for union with Sardinia. *GARIBALDI's* spectacular conquest (1860)
    of the kingdom of the TWO SICILIES was followed by Sardinia's
    annexation of Umbria and the Marches. The kingdom of Italy was
    proclaimed in 1861. Italy received Venetia for its role in the
    AUSTRO-PRUSSIAN WAR of 1866 and seized Rome from the pope in 1870.
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    Papal States
    ------------
    Papal States  (p�'p), from 754 to 1870 the territory under *temporal*
    rule of the popes. 
    
    Both of the above from:
    The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia is licensed from Columbia University
    Press.  Copyright � 1989, 1991 by Columbia University Press. All rights
    reserved.
    
    >>> Key point: Garibaldi and Mazzini were both Freemasons.
                                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^
    Now for the $25,000 question:
    *****************************
    
    Why did Leo in 1884 *really* condemn Freemasonry?
    
    	a) They wouldn't let him join?
    	b) He didn't want to wear the funny clown costumes the Shriners
    	   wear in parades?
    	c) He was the first pope in modern history who lost land to a
    	   Republican revolution and ended up with just an empire the size of
    	   a golf course? He had no way to stop them because the oath of
    	   secrecy precluded him from finding out just who was supporting
    	   the Republican cause?
    
    True fact: Leo was also against Labor Unions and Public Schools